Official Game Day Thread - Winnipeg at Calgary, August 18, 2023

[BBRT]

Finally back online and can post. Had downtime with good ol Telus today. Was at the game yesterday and enjoyed the win - slim win and all. A couple of comments:

> Time to get a new stadium Calgary - forgot how run down McMahon really is
> Really small crowd - my Super Red Section was only 1/2 full if that.
> Hot dogs were still good - but over priced.

As for the game less said the better - not impressed with either team based on what I saw last night - Bombers did enough to win however if Calgary had any receivers that could catch the ball it would not be even close. Saw more dropped balls that caught balls or at least it seemed.

I guess all that counts is the win but had hoped for a more entertaining game that I got.

However Big T's BBQ was outstanding!

[TecnoGenius]

6/10th of one second? Ref looks at clock that says zero. He then looks to see if ball is snapped. If it is, no flag. Lol 6/10th of one second lol.

I've seen timecounts called in less than 6/10th before.  Many times.  Yes, they often let half a second timecounts slide.  But they also call them sometimes.  How do I know?  I freeze frame every timecount penalty to see if it was "for realz" using my computer PVR which has many more features than the lame Shaw/MTS PVRs.  Just like O/S calls, I'm very meticulous about checking every timecount call, because it's my thing.

I'm not sure precisely how the refs on the field judge this, or who has that responsibility, etc., but I am speaking the truth.  Next time I see a sub half-second timecount I'll let you know.

[TecnoGenius]

Is it possible we used Kyrie Wilson as our nationalized American yesterday? On the D's first play we had Jefferson, Thomas, Lawson, Walker and Jeffcoat lined up on the line with Biggie and Kramdi as LBs, with no #19 in site. Kind of an odd lineup for the first play. Wilson came in the next play.  If so, what's the point since we always are playing a couple of nationals on D anyway. Confusing.

Not sure I'm following your train of thought.  No reason why Lawson (NAT) can't come in for Wilson at any time.  No DNA rules needed.

Unless it's the fact that this is the first play that's suspicious to you, because of the "first snap" DNA rules.  But I wouldn't read too much into that.  I'm pretty sure Wilson played more than 23 snaps in place of an extra NAT.  He was on the field almost all the time.  Besides, a) the depth chart (yes that apparently means nothing yada yada) showed no DNA at all, and b) MOS has basically said they are ignoring the DNA rules/features.  To make Wilson the DNA wouldn't be a small tweak to take advantage of the rules, it would be a massive disruption to the scheme.  Using Wilson like that would only make sense if we started a very good NAT WILL, and/or another very good IMP WILL.

[bunker]

Not sure I'm following your train of thought.  No reason why Lawson (NAT) can't come in for Wilson at any time.  No DNA rules needed.

Unless it's the fact that this is the first play that's suspicious to you, because of the "first snap" DNA rules.  But I wouldn't read too much into that.  I'm pretty sure Wilson played more than 23 snaps in place of an extra NAT.  He was on the field almost all the time.  Besides, a) the depth chart (yes that apparently means nothing yada yada) showed no DNA at all, and b) MOS has basically said they are ignoring the DNA rules/features.  To make Wilson the DNA wouldn't be a small tweak to take advantage of the rules, it would be a massive disruption to the scheme.  Using Wilson like that would only make sense if we started a very good NAT WILL, and/or another very good IMP WILL.

All reasonable points. I guess they just started the game with 5 D linemen and Wilson on the bench which I find a bit odd.

[Pete]

having rewatched the game, what stood out to me was the game plan to create 2nd and short situations to take some pressure off of Dru, unfortunately we didnt take advantage of this enough. Breakdowns in execution, penalties and stamps focusing on the run stoppage led to this.
I would have liked to see them go deep on a 2nd and 2 or 3 to at least keep the defence honest. Also i think Drus and Zacs or our o
ffence as a whole's tendancy to roll out right has been scouted and teams are better prepared for it.

[TecnoGenius]

All reasonable points. I guess they just started the game with 5 D linemen and Wilson on the bench which I find a bit odd.

Best I can think of is we were doing that on purpose to send a message to CGY "we aren't playing to your film study plans".  Same reason a team will sometimes launch a 60y pass try on the first play.  Start the game by putting the opponent on their back heels.

We often play wacky schemes like that one, but you're right: it's rarely on the first play.

[TecnoGenius]

having rewatched the game, what stood out to me was the game plan to create 2nd and short situations to take some pressure off of Dru, unfortunately we didnt take advantage of this enough. Breakdowns in execution, penalties and stamps focusing on the run stoppage led to this.
I would have liked to see them go deep on a 2nd and 2 or 3 to at least keep the defence honest. Also i think Drus and Zacs or our offence as a whole's tendancy to roll out right has been scouted and teams are better prepared for it.

Ya, I'm pretty sure we didn't throw on 2nd & short, not even once.  It was always Brady.  And many of them were stuffed.  So much so that MOS noted it in the post-game.  You wouldn't even have to go deep on 2nd&3.  Just throw an instant curl or whatever.  I'd say you have to go at least 25% pass on 2nd to keep them honest.  We would have with Zach...

[Waffler]

> Time to get a new stadium Calgary - forgot how run down McMahon really is

2nd oldest next to McGill isn't it?  1960 I believe. Pretty surprising since Calgary loves shiny and new, showing the world they are big league. It is time and that would make CFL vibrant there again as well as being a feather in the city's cap.

[dd]

Ya I don?t know what happened to our playbook on 2nd and short but in the second half the stamps front 7 were all about stopping Brady yet we didn?t do any quick hitters to get first downs

Hats off to Brady as it was a very physical game and he took and gave out a ton of physical contact. He must be whiped today

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I've seen timecounts called in less than 6/10th before.  Many times.  Yes, they often let half a second timecounts slide.  But they also call them sometimes.  How do I know?  I freeze frame every timecount penalty to see if it was "for realz" using my computer PVR which has many more features than the lame Shaw/MTS PVRs.  Just like O/S calls, I'm very meticulous about checking every timecount call, because it's my thing.

I'm not sure precisely how the refs on the field judge this, or who has that responsibility, etc., but I am speaking the truth.  Next time I see a sub half-second timecount I'll let you know.

I didn't know you watched the game with a stopwatch. No one "lets it slide". There is a process for how a referee calls a time count penalty which I explained above. I suggest to you that there may be a limit to what you are able to learn watching your PVR 400 times until 3 am.

[TecnoGenius]

I didn't know you watched the game with a stopwatch. No one "lets it slide". There is a process for how a referee calls a time count penalty which I explained above. I suggest to you that there may be a limit to what you are able to learn watching your PVR 400 times until 3 am.

You jibe, but I actually do have a track-quality stopwatch right next to my computer and I use it all the time (mostly for QB time-in-pocket).  In any event, I don't use/need it for a timecount, I just need to look at the frame count and time index on my computer PVR.  I look when it says 00 and then frame advance until the ball is snapped.  Simple, and no question on what the interval was.

And refs 100% do let some plays "slide".  Probably to compensate being human and having to make decisions in real time.  And every ref does it a bit differently.  Some "slide it" more than others.  Maybe some are better at their job than others.  That's why I said I've seen timecounts whistled dead with under 1/2sec delay.  I guarantee I'll find you one this season if you want me to.  And I've also seen refs slide timecounts that were 1.5+ seconds this season!

These timecounts are a great example of when refs let it slide, and the next best example is offsides on the waggle.  They'll often let a waggler be 1-2 feet offside on a full run.  In fact, they tend to err on the side of letting those go, or clearly the fan experience would suck.  Those are the ones that many live watchers will swear are offside, and often they are not, but sometimes they are.  This is a function of the refs being unable to match the snap with a waggler down to the tenth of second.  So they account for their limitations and let it slide.  But sometimes they call it offside anyhow, even when on replay the waggler is actually onside.  The inconsistency is what is most annoying.

Lastly there is illegal procedure, which is technically is committed maybe a third of CFL snaps, where a OT or someone rises up from the snap a couple of tenths early.  Our Yoshi (very) often gets up before the ball.  And almost every ref will slide it, but once in a while they are sticklers, especially if it's just an extra tenth early.

I've become so sensitive to these things (especially IP and TC) that I can spot a potential infraction live and then freeze frame to confirm before the refs say boo.

I fully understand what you are saying, the refs are human with cognition-speed limitations, and I don't know the exact ref process having never been a ref (have you?), but you can learn a ton of practical knowledge about how the CFL usually judges things by watching freeze-frames at 3am with your stopwatch.  Don't knock it if you haven't tried it 

[TecnoGenius]

Ya I don?t know what happened to our playbook on 2nd and short but in the second half the stamps front 7 were all about stopping Brady yet we didn?t do any quick hitters to get first downs

I think Buck didn't trust Dru to pass on 2nd down as those CGY guys were trying to INT us on all the short curls and crossers.  How many close INTs did CGY whiff and drop?  Maybe Dru doesn't have the quick timing down pat yet on those short routes, or being a "new guy" has trouble spotting the extra defender hiding somewhere.

We didn't throw deep hardly at all, so it allowed CGY defenders to cheat up to those short routes and sometimes double-team for the risky INT tries.

[TecnoGenius]

I didn't know you watched the game with a stopwatch. No one "lets it slide".

Just found you an example to (partially) prove my point.  MTL@OTT 3Q2:47 they call a IP call on OTT #61 and he is ahead of the snap by only 2/10ths of a sec.  Yes, he starts to move just a tiny fraction a sec before the ball goes back.

Almost every ref in almost every game lets 2/10ths IP slide (whether by being lenient or because a human can't deal with such small timeframes).  This is the tightest IP I've seen called in a long while.  Like I said previously, Yoshi moves this early all the time.  I am actually shocked they made this call here.  At this rate I'll find you a timecount example very soon.

[DM83]

Time counts violations should be  called a penalty when the ref count in his head is ?10 and a?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

You jibe, but I actually do have a track-quality stopwatch right next to my computer and I use it all the time (mostly for QB time-in-pocket).  In any event, I don't use/need it for a timecount, I just need to look at the frame count and time index on my computer PVR.  I look when it says 00 and then frame advance until the ball is snapped.  Simple, and no question on what the interval was.

And refs 100% do let some plays "slide".  Probably to compensate being human and having to make decisions in real time.  And every ref does it a bit differently.  Some "slide it" more than others.  Maybe some are better at their job than others.  That's why I said I've seen timecounts whistled dead with under 1/2sec delay.  I guarantee I'll find you one this season if you want me to.  And I've also seen refs slide timecounts that were 1.5+ seconds this season!

These timecounts are a great example of when refs let it slide, and the next best example is offsides on the waggle.  They'll often let a waggler be 1-2 feet offside on a full run.  In fact, they tend to err on the side of letting those go, or clearly the fan experience would suck.  Those are the ones that many live watchers will swear are offside, and often they are not, but sometimes they are.  This is a function of the refs being unable to match the snap with a waggler down to the tenth of second.  So they account for their limitations and let it slide.  But sometimes they call it offside anyhow, even when on replay the waggler is actually onside.  The inconsistency is what is most annoying.

Lastly there is illegal procedure, which is technically is committed maybe a third of CFL snaps, where a OT or someone rises up from the snap a couple of tenths early.  Our Yoshi (very) often gets up before the ball.  And almost every ref will slide it, but once in a while they are sticklers, especially if it's just an extra tenth early.

I've become so sensitive to these things (especially IP and TC) that I can spot a potential infraction live and then freeze frame to confirm before the refs say boo.

I fully understand what you are saying, the refs are human with cognition-speed limitations, and I don't know the exact ref process having never been a ref (have you?), but you can learn a ton of practical knowledge about how the CFL usually judges things by watching freeze-frames at 3am with your stopwatch.  Don't knock it if you haven't tried it 

...Why do you think in sports when things go to to seconds they show a video feed of the actual arena clock overlayed? Happens most in hockey when goals almost occur as the time expires? It's because the TV clock is unofficial and might be slightly off. Don't want to take my word for it?

https://www.cfl.ca/2009/07/06/the-official-game-clock-vs-tsn-s-clock/

Essentially, you're timing nonsense (if you are trying to split the unofficial clock to milliseconds with a stopwatch) and claiming "discoveries".