Official Game Day Thread - Calgary at Winnipeg, July 12, 2024

[TecnoGenius]

Ask and ye shall receive:

With my computer tech I can tell you exactly what happened re: Demski catch & whistle.

From the moment the ball touches Demski's hands until the moment the whistle sounds is 1.81s.  That's an extremely long time for a ref to take to blow what he thinks is a clear ground-hit incompletion.  I'd say refs usually blow that dead in 0.5 to 0.8s.

Demski catches the ball 2 yards behind LoS down on his knees.  Has to get up.  Gets up, starts accelerating into his run.  The whistle sounds when Demski is 1.5Y past the LoS and running fast.  No D is nearby at all.

So I was a little off on it being 5Y at the whistle (I was estimating before).  Still, we got robbed of a 3.5Y gain.  And the point about "it shouldn't be this way, it's not fair and doesn't make sense" still stands.  There should be a solution, otherwise every behind-LoS play (like hitch screens) have this new added risk of refs robbing you with zero recourse!  If you're a ref and you want to rig a game, here's a great way to do it.  Sure, shoestrings are rare, but it's another tool they can add to their rigging arsenal.  Not saying anyone is rigging anything (see the NFL for that), just saying they can.

Yes, there are provisions for the ref "thinking" the play is dead and taking X tenths of seconds to get the info to their lips to blow.  The spot is always when the thought occurs, not when the whistle goes.  But we're all used to them being pretty quick on that whistle and the difference in yardage is usually slight.  I'm not sure we've seen a ref wait until the player gets back up and runs 3.5Y for almost 2s to blow the whistle before.

If the ref had been faster on the whistle, Demski would never have gotten up and we wouldn't have challenged because there would have been (clearly) no gain.  So the late whistle directly cost us 1 of 2 challenges, and 2Y.

I'm ok with MOS making a statement and getting the moral victory.  I was miffed too.  You can't take that crap from these garbage refs.  That ref could have blown it incomplete immediately, and didn't.  That ref could have assumed it was complete and let CGY challenge if they didn't like it.  Or not blow it dead and wait to consult with the other refs, as they often do, and call it incomplete after it all played out naturally.

Once again, I saw from my 200-level far-back/top-row seats that it was complete, with zero doubt in my mind.  I'm, what, 200Y away total (do some trig math) and I can figure this out better than that ref?

I think the "fix" for this for a challenge behind the LoS when the player is in space should be a redo of down.  dd mentions "inadvertent whistle", but I can't find anything about that in the rulebook (I also looked for "phantom" whistle, or crowd whistle).  There can't be such a loophole where refs can rob teams of positive plays without oversight and recourse.

[dd]

No. It's a little like when refs determine forward momentum has been stopped even before a final whistle.

I didn't particularly pay attention to the play when I re-watched the game today. Did the ref immediately waive off the pass as incomplete? I did notice that even Demski was looking back wondering why the whistle had blown etc. etc.

We can complain all we want but the refs made an error and I understand why yards gained were not allowed.

Demski gained a good 3 maybe 5 yards after the catch and the whistle was delayed a good 2 seconds. Ball should have been spotted where the 0lsy went dead after it was deemed a catch. So 2 errors were made. I don't get why command centre can't radio the ref and let him know that vs let them incorrectly spot the ball

[dd]

I was definitely in the Doug Brown, Why is Wilson on the roster camp but man, glad to be wrong.

Doug Brown questioned why Wilson was on the roster?? Thought he knew football??

[TecnoGenius]

Rule 10 - Replay - Article 4 - The Whistle

... With regards to replay certain aspects cannot not (sic!) be adjusted if the play has been killed by whistle and the players have stopped playing, such as a ruling on a clear recovery after a fumble, or forward advancement of a ball after an incorrect down with contact ruling.  As such officials have been instructed to only sound the whistle when they are certain a play has concluded.

There's a few things here:

1. Typo error ("cannot not") in our official rulebook, yay.  Actually, technically speaking this is a double negative and thus they are saying "certain aspects can be adjusted"!!  According to rule as written, then, command should have given us the entire Demski gain!!  Ya, that's pedantic, but I'm angry, so... (does no one proof-read this stuff?)

2. Also pedantic: the "dead and players stopped" part, that's an "and".  The whistle sounded, but neither Demski nor the D who tackled him stopped or let up or anything.  They played it out as they both thought it was complete (the D guy probably saw it clearly).  Per the letter of the law the predicate wasn't satisfied, so the conclusion should not apply.  We should have been awarded the full gain.  (Yes, I understand that's not the spirit, but I'm not the idiot who used such awful and ambiguous language to write the book!)

3. The last point makes it clear what the standard is.  If that ref didn't see the ball hit the turf (which he couldn't have because it in fact didn't hit it) then he should not be blowing his whistle.  Cut & dried clear as day.  That ref should get reprimanded and the CFL should issue an apology.  What if the whole game hinged on this play in the dying seconds of the 4th?

[TecnoGenius]

Zach is back. Yes he made some early mistakes but that last drive for a TD and 2 PA was elite. IIRC that started on our 12 yard line which is never an easy place to start.

Don't think we took too many bonehead penalties but there were a few. Time count was annoying. The PI on Bonds would have been a completion any way but a mental mistake by him IMO.

The final TD drive by Zach (with a ton of passing) was epic and exactly what we expect of Zach.  And Buck too.  Masterful adjusting to what CGY was doing all game and what they were giving us.  Who here thought we'd pull that off?  Not me!  Feels good, man.

Dickenson The Remaining must have been thinking "oh now Zach decides to get back to MOP form, great".

Penalty situation was massively improved and I'm proud of all the work I know they put into that.  Must have been the main focus this week.  The penalty yardage, minus that one a-bit-weak DPI, was virtually nil.  Good job all!

[TecnoGenius]

That glare on MOS at that point, Holy....must have been the ref he was giving it to.

Ya, that's epic.  He stares him down like 3s and then they cut just as MOS starts chirping at him.

But hey, the chirping "worked" because later in the game they gave CGY a completion that probably really did hit the turf... thanks ref man...

[TecnoGenius]

Sure, but if that play wasnt challenged there's a higher probability that O'Shea would have challenged PI in the endzone.

Good point.  I'm not sure we've see 2 challenges by a single HC in a single game this season yet.  It is a rare thing, but it will change your mindset for a later challenge to know if you'll then be out of challenges.  (I don't think he wins the 2nd challenge, BTW, too weak & iffy.)

[Blue In BC]

Good point.  I'm not sure we've see 2 challenges by a single HC in a single game this season yet.  It is a rare thing, but it will change your mindset for a later challenge to know if you'll then be out of challenges.  (I don't think he wins the 2nd challenge, BTW, too weak & iffy.)

You saw it in this game. O'Shea challenged the unintentional PI that he won.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Post game writeup by John Hodge.

https://3downnation.com/2024/07/13/winnipeg-blue-bombers-win-game-season-series-against-stampeders-13-other-thoughts/

From that article.

"For the record, Grant's contract with the Argos will pay him $84,000 in hard money this season with playtime bonuses maxing out at $92,500, per source. It's hardly a rich deal."

[theaardvark]

Post game writeup by John Hodge.

https://3downnation.com/2024/07/13/winnipeg-blue-bombers-win-game-season-series-against-stampeders-13-other-thoughts/

From that article.

"For the record, Grant's contract with the Argos will pay him $84,000 in hard money this season with playtime bonuses maxing out at $92,500, per source. It's hardly a rich deal."

We don't know if this was another Harris issue, with Grant's injury issues, did we want a physical before signing him?  And Pinball said "Yes" sight unseen?  I really don't see us not signing him for a difference of $22k max, or allowing him to escape to TO where its going to cost him probably $20k more to live...

Walters said there was a chance to sign him:

"There's still a chance Bombers returner Janarion Grant will be back this year. They just need to find him. Walters said Grant has been difficult to reach, with even his agent struggling to nail down his whereabouts at times. It's not the first time this has happened, though, and the Bombers continue to see if a deal can get done.

"His agent actually shot me a note last night," Walters said. "So we'll kind of circle back and see what can or can't be done with Janarion."





Grant was probably given assurances of playing time outside of returning.

[Jesse]

We don't know if this was another Harris issue, with Grant's injury issues, did we want a physical before signing him?  And Pinball said "Yes" sight unseen?  I really don't see us not signing him for a difference of $22k max, or allowing him to escape to TO where its going to cost him probably $20k more to live...

Walters said there was a chance to sign him:

"There's still a chance Bombers returner Janarion Grant will be back this year. They just need to find him. Walters said Grant has been difficult to reach, with even his agent struggling to nail down his whereabouts at times. It's not the first time this has happened, though, and the Bombers continue to see if a deal can get done.

"His agent actually shot me a note last night," Walters said. "So we'll kind of circle back and see what can or can't be done with Janarion."





Grant was probably given assurances of playing time outside of returning.

He hasn't been given any extra time for Toronto though.

[TecnoGenius]

You saw it in this game. O'Shea challenged the unintentional PI that he won.

Uh, I meant up to that point!  Holy smokes.  And even including the MOS instance my point is using 2 is mega-rare the last long while in the CFL.  Ever since they stopped allowing IC fishing the use-2 case is very rare.

[TecnoGenius]

He hasn't been given any extra time for Toronto though.

Every game or 2 they give him a sweep on O.  Basically what we did until he got creamed.

If we could have had Grant for $84k and allowed him to run O more (as long as we didn't have to give him a signing bonus) then we made a biiiig mistake not taking him.  Who cares if he was going to be injured up the wazoo again... if there's no bonus, there's no cost.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Every game or 2 they give him a sweep on O.  Basically what we did until he got creamed.

If we could have had Grant for $84k and allowed him to run O more (as long as we didn't have to give him a signing bonus) then we made a biiiig mistake not taking him.  Who cares if he was going to be injured up the wazoo again... if there's no bonus, there's no cost.

I don't see a problem if vets like Grant or Jeffcoat who are aging out spend some of the season on the IR, it's the perfect situation to benefit from their high level of skill when playing as well as test out or prep. the next guy looking to steal their jobs. It makes for a smoother transition with less unknown surprises.

[blue_gold_84]

He hasn't been given any extra time for Toronto though.

Has he even taken a snap on offense?