EDM @ SSK Sept 16 GDT

[dd]

Lauther had an uncharacteristic bad night, if he was on point they win. Still, Riders have no O line whatsoever, fajardo was running for his life every play. All of a sudden sask making the playoffs is not a given, wouldn?t that be something if they didn?t!!

[Lincoln Locomotive]

Edmonton got a TD they didn't deserve after fumbling on the play before. Riders should have got the ball which likely would have given them the win.

they allowed the Elks to move the ball with just over a minute remaining....the Elks are full value for beating them and Castillo has a history of making kicks when it matters....despite his sun-par season this year.    The Elks made just enough plays to win and the Riders again snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.    They will be hard pressed to even make a crossover, especially if BC can win a game or two with VA.   If Rourke does come back late in the season it will make things very interesting in the West.   Calgary looks solid and it will likely be BC they face in the SF....that is assuming we clinch first place in the West.   
The Riders, continue to find ways to lose and that has been their Achilles heel most of the season.....not to mention a very weak O-line resulting in CF running for his life!
Football is a game of what ifs and the outcome is affected by so many factors.....bad calls go either way as does luck (the football Gods) at times and isolating one play or missed call as a game breaker isn't always that easy to isolate.   

[Blue In BC]

Lauther had an uncharacteristic bad night, if he was on point they win. Still, Riders have no O line whatsoever, fajardo was running for his life every play. All of a sudden sask making the playoffs is not a given, wouldn?t that be something if they didn?t!!

LOL. He missed 2 FG's and got 1 single. In theory the Riders could have scored 5 more points then they did as a result.

Castillo missed 1 FG which would have resulted in 3 more points.

If all of those misses were made we'd have Riders scoring 29 points and Elks scoring 29 points. So suggesting the Riders would have won if Lauther was accurate is not true. Game might have gone to OT.

It's not impossible the Riders do miss a crossover. They still have to play the Bombers once more in Winnipeg. Then they have 2 games against the Stamps and 1 against the Ti Cats and Elks again.

That's not an easy schedule for the most part. Fajardo might not survive the season getting sacked as often as he has in 2022.

OTOH I have zero confidence that the Elks can rise to 4th in the west division and win more games than the 3rd place eastern team.

[3rdand1.5]

Edmonton got a TD they didn't deserve after fumbling on the play before. Riders should have got the ball which likely would have given them the win.

While an argument could be made on this, if you go watch the replay a D-lineman was offside, not terribly but as much as we were on the "close call" so it actually should have been a non-counting play and Edm. 1st and goal.

[TBURGESS]

Fumble given to wrong team:

1. The Riders ended up with it and should have been given the ball.
2. Before or after the whistle means the whistle shouldn't have blown until the ball was recovered, not that the ball should be given to the offence.
3. Other plays where the Riders could have overcome the bad call/losing the ball/TD from a bad call have nothing to do with the call itself.
4. Two games in less than a month, settled by less points that giving the ball to the wrong team netted = a problem for the CFL.
5. Just because the calls helped us and hurt the Riders, doesn't make them good calls.

[3rdand1.5]

Sask. did cut down on penalties. While we all like to razz Fajardo, and I am not saying he played anywhere near great. I do feel a bit for the guy, he was sacked 8 or 9 times and was close at least 5 or 6 more times. Edm. did this with mostly 3 and 4 man rushes meaning they were outmanning the receivers. Sask.is in trouble IMO they lack ownership of their losses, they look for excuses instead of looking in the mirror.

Edm. played ok, but the penalties, they really need to clean that up, if they cleaned up the penalties they probably would have manhandled the Riders. Without Lawler yet. IMO Carter needs to move to offence or sit, he is a terrible tackler. The Edm. O-line IMO played pretty darn good, Sask was at times throwing 5-6 at them and they handled it pretty good. Teams are built from the lines, and they might have something along the O-line, there D-line isn't looking terrible. Jones as much of a nit as he is might actually field a good team next year.

[Pigskin]

Edmonton got a TD they didn't deserve after fumbling on the play before. Riders should have got the ball which likely would have given them the win.

Not true. Riders recovered the ball. But to the say without that TD Riders win?

[Tiger]

What was interesting to me is how poorly Hickson ran when he ran so well against us. Why is the question.  Oline is more banged up or less motivated?

[Blue In BC]

Fumble given to wrong team:

1. The Riders ended up with it and should have been given the ball.
2. Before or after the whistle means the whistle shouldn't have blown until the ball was recovered, not that the ball should be given to the offence.
3. Other plays where the Riders could have overcome the bad call/losing the ball/TD from a bad call have nothing to do with the call itself.
4. Two games in less than a month, settled by less points that giving the ball to the wrong team netted = a problem for the CFL.
5. Just because the calls helped us and hurt the Riders, doesn't make them good calls.

You're discounting the possibility that an Elk recovered the ball in the pile, then the whistle blew and then a Rider ripped it out of his hands.

That's the issue. There was nothing that proved anything other than there was a fumble. There was no evidence that the Riders recovered it prior to the whistle.

[TBURGESS]

You're discounting the possibility that an Elk recovered the ball in the pile, then the whistle blew and then a Rider ripped it out of his hands.

That's the issue. There was nothing that proved anything other than there was a fumble. There was no evidence that the Riders recovered it prior to the whistle.

Official call: (12:48) T. CORNELIUS Run QB Sneak (0 yds), T. CORNELIUS Fumble forced by D. SANKEY, Recovered by T. CORNELIUS at S1 (0 yds), Tackle: D. SANKEY, PLAY REVIEWED (Coach): Call Stands, CHALLENGE: Saskatchewan challenged for a fumble recovery.

I'm not sure how Cornelius recovers a ball that was behind him, but that means you are right & I'm wrong. It was called a recovery by the Elks.

Flame away folks.

[Pigskin]

Official call: (12:48) T. CORNELIUS Run QB Sneak (0 yds), T. CORNELIUS Fumble forced by D. SANKEY, Recovered by T. CORNELIUS at S1 (0 yds), Tackle: D. SANKEY, PLAY REVIEWED (Coach): Call Stands, CHALLENGE: Saskatchewan challenged for a fumble recovery.

I'm not sure how Cornelius recovers a ball that was behind him, but that means you are right & I'm wrong. It was called a recovery by the Elks.

Flame away folks.

He didn't recover it. Should have been Rider ball.

[TBURGESS]

He didn't recover it. Should have been Rider ball.

That's the way I saw it too, but all we have is the camera views. The Ref was actually looking inside the pile so he has a better view than we do.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

You're discounting the possibility that an Elk recovered the ball in the pile, then the whistle blew and then a Rider ripped it out of his hands.

That's the issue. There was nothing that proved anything other than there was a fumble. There was no evidence that the Riders recovered it prior to the whistle.

That's the thing, if the players knew the whistle wouldn't blow until possession could be clearly shown, every pile up would devolve into a brawl, with the strongest (or dirtiest) players always winning possession.

[Blue In BC]

Official call: (12:48) T. CORNELIUS Run QB Sneak (0 yds), T. CORNELIUS Fumble forced by D. SANKEY, Recovered by T. CORNELIUS at S1 (0 yds), Tackle: D. SANKEY, PLAY REVIEWED (Coach): Call Stands, CHALLENGE: Saskatchewan challenged for a fumble recovery.

I'm not sure how Cornelius recovers a ball that was behind him, but that means you are right & I'm wrong. It was called a recovery by the Elks.

Flame away folks.

That's the way I saw it too, but all we have is the camera views. The Ref was actually looking inside the pile so he has a better view than we do.

The ball travelled forward between the legs of an ELK. That may or may not have been Cornelius. What happened in the pile may have been more obvious to a ref standing near the pile, moreso than what we saw on TV. He may have seen the hands of an ELK in possession but it could have been an OL as well.

I wouldn't say I'm convinced what happened in the scrum.  The refs didn't make a call immediately. Nothing on camera showed anything that could be conclusive.

We can only go by a decision which included a challenge review that didn't award the ball to the Riders. The Rider that ended up with the ball may know than he admits. It's a little like a receiver knowing the ball touched the ground when a catch is ruled.

It's not a matter of me being right or you being wrong. Some plays fall into more of a grey hole than others and we can't see everything a ref might see next to the pile.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

The ball travelled forward between the legs of an ELK. That may or may not have been Cornelius. What happened in the pile may have been more obvious to a ref standing near the pile, moreso than what we saw on TV. He may have seen the hands of an ELK in possession but it could have been an OL as well.

I wouldn't say I'm convinced what happened in the scrum.  The refs didn't make a call immediately. Nothing on camera showed anything that could be conclusive.

We can only go by a decision which included a challenge review that didn't award the ball to the Riders. The Rider that ended up with the ball may know than he admits. It's a little like a receiver knowing the ball touched the ground when a catch is ruled.

It's not a matter of me being right or you being wrong. Some plays fall into more of a grey hole than others and we can't see everything a ref might see next to the pile.

It's quite possible for an official standing right beside the pile not to catch sight of the ball at all if he's looking for it in the wrong area among the chaos of bodies.  After 4 seconds, the whistle blows and the referee comes to the conclusion that none of the officials could determine exactly what happened on the play. The home viewing audience probably saw more than they did.