CFL under fire for blown call....

[WestCoastJoe]

This fan is more inclined to roll with the officiating. Bad calls tend to even up over time, it seems to me, and not by having make up calls. A call at the end is given more attention than calls earlier in the game.

This fan does not think there is deliberate bias for or against.

Is there incompetence? Well how much do these guys get paid? Are they full time? They do the best they can. Those here that have refereed some games at any level know how difficult the task is.

This fan has officiated at football, softball and basketball games at the teenage level, and lived to tell about it. It is not an easy task.

Disgusted at the CFL? Well, it ain't anywhere near the top of the sports heap in revenue. This fan likes it for the quality of the game itself. I have tried to take the officiating out of the picture in my own mind. Ouch at the time. Then ... whatever, it is just a game.

[DanoT]

This fan is more inclined to roll with the officiating. Bad calls tend to even up over time, it seems to me, and not by having make up calls. A call at the end is given more attention than calls earlier in the game.

This fan does not think there is deliberate bias for or against.

Is there incompetence? Well how much do these guys get paid? Are they full time? They do the best they can. Those here that have refereed some games at any level know how difficult the task is.

This fan has officiated at football, softball and basketball games at the teenage level, and lived to tell about it. It is not an easy task.

Disgusted at the CFL? Well, it ain't anywhere near the top of the sports heap in revenue. This fan likes it for the quality of the game itself. I have tried to take the officiating out of the picture in my own mind. Ouch at the time. Then ... whatever, it is just a game.

I agree with your point of view of the game officials, but the Command Centre shouldn't be missing the calls because they get to see multi angles, slow mo etc. To say that there is not enough video evidence is a classic cop out and in this case pretty much anyone who has seen the video is not buying their B.S.

[WestCoastJoe]

This fan is more inclined to roll with the officiating. Bad calls tend to even up over time, it seems to me, and not by having make up calls. A call at the end is given more attention than calls earlier in the game.

This fan does not think there is deliberate bias for or against.

Is there incompetence? Well how much do these guys get paid? Are they full time? They do the best they can. Those here that have refereed some games at any level know how difficult the task is.

This fan has officiated at football, softball and basketball games at the teenage level, and lived to tell about it. It is not an easy task.

Disgusted at the CFL? Well, it ain't anywhere near the top of the sports heap in revenue. This fan likes it for the quality of the game itself. I have tried to take the officiating out of the picture in my own mind. Ouch at the time. Then ... whatever, it is just a game.

I agree with your point of view of the game officials, but the Command Centre shouldn't be missing the calls because they get to see multi angles, slow mo etc. To say that there is not enough video evidence is a classic cop out and in this case pretty much anyone who has seen the video is not buying their B.S.

I know what you are saying, Dano.

If the whistle went, it seems to me the call cannot be overturned. Apparently, no quick whistle.

If the whistle did not go, then it could be overturned. In any case, I still tend to feel, at this stage of my life, that the calls even out in the long run, and, once again, not because of make up calls.

[Blitz]

This is the way I believe Jake Ireland played out the call in the Command Center.

1. If his guide dog barks once, the Bombers keep the ball.

2. If his guide dog barks twice, the Lions get the ball.

Unfortunately, Ireland's hearing aid battery died between barks so....

There you go, Blitz, I updated that post to more accurately reflect how the Command Center works for you.

I

I know what you are saying, Dano.

If the whistle went, it seems to me the call cannot be overturned.

If the whistle did not go, then it could be overturned. In any case, I still tend to feel, at this stage of my life, that the calls even out in the long run. WCJ

The CFL reviewed the play, with the whistle having been blown after the fumble. If the whistle had blown, they would have made the statement that the play had been whistled dead. They didn't. Ireland ruled there was no indisputable visual evidence to change the call made on the field,” and “It could not be determined from the angles provided if the player had completely lost possession of the ball before the player’s backside had touched the ground".

It was obvious that the football was coming loose before Harris's backside hit the ground. Even Bomber great Milt Steggal knew it was the wrong call and many CFL players who are not Leos have commented on the bad call from the Command Center.

Its very rare for me to comment on officiating on the field. Like B.C. Fan and WCJ, I consider officiating a part of the game that is done by humans, just like players, and therefore imperfect. Like you WCJ, I've officiated a few high school football games (reluctantly) and its not easy and the game is a heck of a lot slower at that level than the pro level. I think CFL officials are much better now than in the days of Jake Ireland. Video review forced officials to referee better and the CFL has also put a lot more time and energy into training officials than the old days. All games are reviewed with officials and they are graded now.

But I'm with Dano and David and others that the Command Center is not officiating on the playing field, where I support officials. Those officials are making a split second call in fast live action. The play can be reviewed from multiple camera angles, slowed down, freeze framed, blown up etc. I expect the Command Center, when there are many camera angles of a play, to get it right.

[David]

Correct Blitz. Let me be very clear. I was not throwing Tom Vallesi and his crew under the bus. That would have been really hard to determine in real time (not to mention it would have taken boulder-sized cajones to make that call go the Lions' way in Winnipeg). Other than too many 'ticky tack' calls, I have no problem with the officiating - it's a very challenging and thankless job.

Had there been no such thing as a "Command Centre," I probably would have watched the replay, cursed out loud a few times in the heat of the moment and moved on. This was not about them. This was about a process that's supposed to take the guess work and judgement out of the referee's work - like an editor or proof reader, and they failed. At a critical part of the game - and season.


DH

[B.C.FAN]

Correct Blitz. Let me be very clear. I was not throwing Tom Vallesi and his crew under the bus. That would have been really hard to determine in real time (not to mention it would have taken boulder-sized cajones to make that call go the Lions' way in Winnipeg). Other than too many 'ticky tack' calls, I have no problem with the officiating - it's a very challenging and thankless job.

Had there been no such thing as a "Command Centre," I probably would have watched the replay, cursed out loud a few times in the heat of the moment and moved on. This was not about them. This was about a process that's supposed to take the guess work and judgement out of the referee's work - like an editor or proof reader, and they failed. At a critical part of the game - and season.


DH

It's a judgment call. There is no right and wrong. Was there clear evidence to overturn the call on the field? Apparently not. I can accept that judgment.

[WestCoastJoe]

http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/video/bombers-lio ... ion~968571

http://3downnation.com/2016/10/08/cfl-f ... s-win-b-c/

http://www.cfl.ca/games/2338/

There are some issues here.

No game sound in the above video. I would guess that the whistle has not gone. So, let's discount the whistle as ending the play. Unless, the Command Centre is not sure if the whistle went. Does the Command Centre have sound in their review film?

It does look like the ball comes out a millisecond before Harris' butt hits the ground. He is gang tackled, very close to the ground, when the ball comes out.

Coaching points: This is not like the old days. A runner would be criticized for not holding on to the football. But nowadays, defenders are very skilled at stripping the ball. Two guys pulling away at it, with the runner trying to hold on. Harris is obviously trying to hold onto the ball. It ain't easy in those circumstances. I have sympathy for the RBs. A ball ripped out of the grasp seems like a cheap way to get a fumble. This fan does not like it. And in that situation, perhaps a team needs a running back specialist who can absolutely hold onto the football despite three defenders trying to rip it out. I would consider that as a coach. "Jimmy, get in there and hold on to the ball." LOL Yardage is not really needed. It is more of a case of using time. Harris should not have gotten his back turned, like a turtle on his back, with the ball exposed to the upside, as he pushed for extra yards.

If the officials on the field had gotten the call right, a fumble, then any outcry from the Bombers' fans might have been muted. As it is, the Lions' fans feel robbed.

Dunno the protocols at the Command Centre. Do they vote? LOL Do they need a degree of certainty? "I am 90% sure he fumbled." "No, you have to be 100% sure." Obviously there will be close calls. Did they think that there was a fumble, but that it was too close, too quick? Would they have changed the call if the ball had come out when Harris was only just starting to descend to the ground, instead of a millisecond from touching down? What if the ball comes out 1/10th of a second before touching down? Too close to overturn? It seems clear that if it comes out a full second before touching down, it is easy to overturn the call on the field. Just considering, as are we all on here ...

It's a judgment call. There is no right and wrong. Was there clear evidence to overturn the call on the field? Apparently not. I can accept that judgment.

It looks like, even in the Command Centre, it is a judgment call. If humans are involved, it is a judgment call. It is not mathematics.

Tough call for the Lions. A game saver for the Bombers.

Calls on the field. Very difficult.

Command Centre. Do we really think they will get all or most of the calls right? Nah ... It just adds another level of attempting to get it right.

These are just my views on the situation.

[WestCoastJoe]

Sidebar.

Coaches and players push the rules. Yup.

Lester Hayes, DB with the Raiders had stickum all over his uniform. Disgusting. Eventually the league put limits on it, I seem to recall. I put some pictures on here years ago.

Stripping the ball. Some coach, somewhere, will be upset at losing a game to a stripped ball. He, or the player, will find a way to add adhesive or tape to the inside of the forearms, add padding which aids retention of the football, wear super-adhesive gloves, et cetera. They will push it to an extreme. League rulings will set standards.

I wonder if this has happened at some high school ... A runner tucks the ball into a pouch at the front of the jersey. Pretty hard to rip it out of there. What would the penalty call be at this time? Unsportsmanlike conduct, methinks. LOL

OK, signing off, back later ...

[BC 1988]

I agree with WCJ that it's pointless to blame officiating or the Command Centre for the loss. No way was there any conspiracy that WPG had to have the home win. There are always what appear to be evening-up calls in any sport, but that was not one of them. To those who find fault with the CC, would you rather have all plays decided solely by the on - field officials? I wouldn't.

[Blitz]

Correct Blitz. Let me be very clear. I was not throwing Tom Vallesi and his crew under the bus. That would have been really hard to determine in real time (not to mention it would have taken boulder-sized cajones to make that call go the Lions' way in Winnipeg). Other than too many 'ticky tack' calls, I have no problem with the officiating - it's a very challenging and thankless job.

Had there been no such thing as a "Command Centre," I probably would have watched the replay, cursed out loud a few times in the heat of the moment and moved on. This was not about them. This was about a process that's supposed to take the guess work and judgement out of the referee's work - like an editor or proof reader, and they failed. At a critical part of the game - and season.

DH

It's a judgment call. There is no right and wrong. Was there clear evidence to overturn the call on the field? Apparently not. I can accept that judgment.

I find myself, respectfully, having a different view of this 'incident' than WCJ and B.C. Fan - two heavy weights on Lionbackers who really know their football.

But I don't see this as a 'judgement call" by the Command Center nor do other CFL football players, fans, and sports writers not connected to the-B.C. Lions. It was a clear fumble.

The way the CFL handed this

..."no real explanation was given until a couple of hours following the game. Quietly, the league issued a statement to Drew Edwards of 3DownNation. They did not send it out via press release to the media to offer clarity, they remained mute on it on their social media channels — where the CFL often boasts of their in-house decisions. They tried to hide instead of being accountable for all to see".

adds weight to the argument.

It was clear as day, visible for anyone’s naked, untrained eye to see. Not sure what kind of medical benefits package the league office offers, but I’d add optometry to it, if it’s not already there.

The ball was loose, it should have been ruled a fumble and Lions ball, and one last chance for Jon Jennings against that Winnipeg defense, with the game on the line, in front of the loudest stadium in the CFL

Madani: With Latest Blunder, Confidence in Replay Reaches New Low

Editor’s Note: Arash Madani is a reporter and commentator for Rogers Sportsnet. He is a columnist for 3DownNation.

Of all the shames from Saturday night, two stand out: one, we were robbed of a sensational finish to an otherwise sensational football game and two; no stakeholder – be it a fan, coach, player, you name it – can have confidence in replay review. The CFL Command Centre clearly has no idea what a fumble is.

The Blue Bombers defence had just finished a terrific goal line stand, Moe Leggett making a world class play on Chris Rainey to shut the door on 3rd-and-1, with B.C. trailing four, and under a minute to play.

Leggett and the Winnipeg defence should have had to do it again. With the clock winding down. With playoff implications and home field and jobs on the line.

But instead, with the ball clearly moving and coming out of Andrew Harris’s arms, the league’s top replay officials deemed the Bombers tailback was down by contact.

Here’s the problem: he wasn’t.

You saw it, I saw it, Wally Buono saw it, Mike O’Shea saw it. A national television audience saw it.

It was clear as day, visible for anyone’s naked, untrained eye to see. Not sure what kind of medical benefits package the league office offers, but I’d add optometry to it, if it’s not already there.

The ball was loose, it should have been ruled a fumble and Lions ball, and one last chance for Jon Jennings against that Winnipeg defense, with the game on the line, in front of the loudest stadium in the CFL.

Instead, it wasn’t and no real explanation was given until a couple of hours following the game. Quietly, the league issued a statement to Drew Edwards of 3DownNation. They did not send it out via press release to the media to offer clarity, they remained mute on it on their social media channels — where the CFL often boasts of their in-house decisions. They tried to hide instead of being accountable for all to see.

The league claimed there was no visual evidence to overturn the call made on the field. That it, ahem, “could not be determined from the angles provided” if Harris had lost possession of the ball before his butt touched the ground.

How is it that everyone saw it but the command centre?

A Leos player fired me back four consecutive text messages when I copied and pasted the league’s ruling to him.
“Nope.”
“Wrong.”
“Wow.”
“I mean…”

Then 22 minutes went by and, unsolicited, came this from that very same player.

“If that wasn’t ruled forward progress and whistled dead, that’s bad. Like Fail Mary bad.”

The only plausible explanation for why the Harris bobble was not ruled a fumble is that: forward progress. That was the predominant belief by many football people league-wide who were watching the game live. But, then, you began to wonder: if this was a forward progress issue, why was it even a reviewable play, then?

“I don’t care who wins,” a team executive messaged over, “but [expletive] me.”

The role of replay and the Command Centre is quite simple: get it right. If the league is incapable of making that happen, in critical, game defining moments, then what is the point of having the system in place?

And what a shame, as we look back on the game of the year, that it is tainted this way. This was a high-flying duel between two heavyweights, wanting their shot to fight for the belt next month. Winnipeg came out swinging fast, and B.C. took the blows in stride. Then came Jennings, with his cool moxie and wise-beyond-his-years poise, and he gave us more reason to believe Bryan Burnham is a human highlight reel.

The playoffs are a month away, and this game was played at a post-season level. It had it all. You just couldn’t turn away.
Some football executives are not fans of mic’ing up players and coaches, but on this stage, with the exchange of uppercuts and jabs for four quarters, it added to the theatre. You felt the tension. You understood the urgency, sensed just how much this one mattered to both teams. October football like this is why we come back for more.

Down the stretch, it was one big play after another. It was two teams, late in the year and their bodies battered, who left everything there. Leggett’s season looked over, for crying out loud, when he hobbled off early in the game, yet there he was, when push came to shove, in the dying moments of the final round, leaving his mark on a ballgame that for 59 minutes was the gold standard. Of why we watch, of why we maintain that you can put a classic three down game up against anything south of the border.

Then, just before the bell, the judges intervened. Earl and Dave Hebner could not have been this foolish. The puzzlement in the stadium was shared in living rooms across the country. Even the television studio panel, looking at the very same angles the Command Centre did, couldn’t offer any reason on how or why that wasn’t an Andrew Harris fumble

For more than three hours, two good football teams put on a spectacular show. For 59 minutes, it was Canadian football at its very best. The additional bells and whistles only added to it. You had the sense you were right there with them, feeling what they felt.
Then, just as Leggett and his defence should have come on to match-up one more time with Jennings and the B.C. red zone unit, out of thin air came an inexplicable ruling that left you feeling gross about the whole thing.

How could this be? Let them play! That’s a fumble, damn it.

We’ll never know if Leggett and his unit would have had another stop left in them. Or if Khari Jones would have kept the gadget plays in his holster for that final goal line series.

When Dale Scott blew it in Game 5 of the ALDS last October, calling the play dead in a sequence where the ball was live, he owned up to it post-game — speaking to a pool reporter. A week prior, officials missed the illegal bat by Seahawks linebacker K.J. Wright at the end of a Monday Night Football game. Not long after, NFL officiating boss Dean Blandino was on television to explain what had happened and went wrong. And the NBA, of course, sends out memos when its officials make mistakes in the final minutes of games.

The CFL does none of that. In this scenario, though, it’s not on the stripes on the field. Glen Johnson owed it to viewers to provide a spin-free explanation. But didn’t.

The league sabotaged itself again Saturday night, and this time it may have decided the outcome of a game. It certainly robbed its audience of a fabulous finish at the gun.

The shame of it all is what was revealed to us all on Saturday night: that the people who are supposed to get it right are incapable of doing exactly that.

Arash Madani

Arash Madani is a reporter for Sportsnet. He has staffed 11 Grey Cups & does play-by-play for CIS Football. His dream: the Gaiters playing for a Vanier.

[B.C.FAN]

Wally and Jason Arakgi had the right attitude when asked about the play at practice Monday.

“I couldn’t tell,” Buono admitted. “I didn’t see all the TSN angles. But (even if it was a fumble) that’s not why we lost. If I go there, these guys (Lions players) don’t see the reality and the truth. I can’t say that. I don’t want the players to use that as a crutch, to explain why we lost. That’s not why we lost.”

“I agree with Wally 100 per cent,” Arakgi said. “To blame the referees or the command centre, or to blame anyone, is a cop-out, an excuse. It’s kind of b.s. We didn’t lose that game because of one play. You never lose a game on one situation. We dug ourselves a hole, and we need to play better football this week.”

Wally and the players also broke down the real reasons for the loss, the ones they can control and try to correct for the next game.

Mike Beamish article

[David]

That article is a wily CFL veteran at work. Coaching 101. Focus internally on the team and what it needs to do to be better and not let outside forces (be it referee's decisions, opposition cheap shots, fan involvement, inclement weather etc) dictate. He realizes that to make an issue of the Command Centre's error is to divert his club's attention from correcting its mistakes for the rematch. To acknowledge the fumble is to provide a ready-made excuse for his football club. Everyone now just needs to let it go.

While I think Wally has moved on, I really don't believe his statement to the media is how he really feels (hasn't seen all the angles. Are you kidding me?!? This guy doesn't miss a trick. He even takes a mental note of which fans show up at practice). I'll lay down a week's wages that he was peeling paint with league headquarters behind closed doors, out of earshot of his team.


DH

[Blitz]

That article is a wily CFL veteran at work. Coaching 101. Focus internally on the team and what it needs to do to be better and not let outside forces (be it referee's decisions, opposition cheap shots, fan involvement, inclement weather etc) dictate. He realizes that to make an issue of the Command Centre's error is to divert his club's attention from correcting its mistakes for the rematch. To acknowledge the fumble is to provide a ready-made excuse for his football club. Everyone now just needs to let it go.

While I think Wally has moved on, I really don't believe his statement to the media is how he really feels (hasn't seen all the angles. Are you kidding me?!? This guy doesn't miss a trick. He even takes a mental note of which fans show up at practice). I'll lay down a week's wages that he was peeling paint with league headquarters behind closed doors, out of earshot of his team.


DH

Wally is wise to focus on what his team needs to do to improve, rather than focusing on the Command Center's call. But, like you, David, you can bet Wally expressed his upset with CFL headquarters over the video review.

I also have posted more once, the many reasons why I thought our Leos lost a game they should have won.

But that doesn't change the fact that it was a blown call by the Command Center.

[Lionsfan65]

That article is a wily CFL veteran at work. Coaching 101. Focus internally on the team and what it needs to do to be better and not let outside forces (be it referee's decisions, opposition cheap shots, fan involvement, inclement weather etc) dictate. He realizes that to make an issue of the Command Centre's mistake is to divert his club's attention from correcting its mistakes for the rematch. To acknowledge the fumble is to provide a ready-made excuse for his football club. Everyone now just needs to let it go.

While I think Wally has moved on, I really don't believe his statement to the media is how he really feels. I'll lay down a week's wages that he was peeling paint with league headquarters behind closed doors, out of earshot of his team.


DH

Wally is wise to focus on what his team needs to do to improve, rather than focusing on the Command Center's call. But, like you, David, you can bet Wally expressed his upset with CFL headquarters over the video review.

I also have posted more once, the many reasons why I thought our Leos lost a game they should have won.

But that doesn't change the fact that it was a blown call by the Command Center.

Agreed, if I was in Wally's position, I sure wouldn't be happy about it. Sure its not the only reason that they lost, but had the call gone the other way, there likely would have been a different outcome to the game.

CFL officiating has really gone down hill over the past few years, while I am not throwing Vallessi and company, or any other ref under the bus, the on field product has to be better in the officiating part of the game too. I'm a millennial, I'm part of the generation of fans that the CFL is trying to attract, the game was exciting, on of the best games across the entire league all year, however it will be remembered only for the blown call at the end, the refs on the field got it wrong, the eye in the sky, and the command centre, supposedly in place to ensure that the correct call is made, got it wrong. The league is going to have a hard time attracting new fans with garbage officiating like that.

What I suggest the league should do would be to publish the officiating crews name and jersey number, just like they do the players, they can have a separate stats column for the officials to see who is making certain calls, and make that available to the public, even broadcasting during the game after the penalty is announced, as an example "that flag was thrown by the umpire #31 Ben Major". This would make the officials more accountable. I think we would start to see a pretty clear pattern which officials are the better ones.

[WestCoastJoe]

I agree with WCJ that it's pointless to blame officiating or the Command Centre for the loss. No way was there any conspiracy that WPG had to have the home win. There are always what appear to be evening-up calls in any sport, but that was not one of them. To those who find fault with the CC, would you rather have all plays decided solely by the on - field officials? I wouldn't.

Wally and Jason Arakgi had the right attitude when asked about the play at practice Monday.

“I couldn’t tell,” Buono admitted. “I didn’t see all the TSN angles. But (even if it was a fumble) that’s not why we lost. If I go there, these guys (Lions players) don’t see the reality and the truth. I can’t say that. I don’t want the players to use that as a crutch, to explain why we lost. That’s not why we lost.”

“I agree with Wally 100 per cent,” Arakgi said. “To blame the referees or the command centre, or to blame anyone, is a cop-out, an excuse. It’s kind of b.s. We didn’t lose that game because of one play. You never lose a game on one situation. We dug ourselves a hole, and we need to play better football this week.”

Wally and the players also broke down the real reasons for the loss, the ones they can control and try to correct for the next game.

Mike Beamish article

From a coaching point of view, I agree with Wally. Dwelling on blaming the call for the defeat does your team no good. We might have been out-coached in the game, but Wally is doing the right thing regarding the call, IMO.

Bad calls happen. Baseball. Basketball. Hockey. Football.

Some of us, all of us perhaps, have seen deliberate bad calls, oftentimes with teenage sports. Homer officiating. It happens. This fan does not think that happens in the CFL. (If a number of fans think it does, this thread can expand.)

If a call is not biased, this fan can live with the result. Was a ball a strike? Was a strike a ball? Borderline calls. Safe at first? Some calls can be seen clearly on replay. Some cannot.

I don't know the protocols re the CFL Command Centre. Does the replay film include sound? That would be important.

Was there good reason to not overturn the call on the field? Or did the CC "chicken out"?

What constitutes "clearly" when it gets down to milliseconds?

Have we been informed of all that went on at CC? Have we been informed of how the decision was made in detail? Was there really enough information to overturn the call on the field?

It looks clearly like a blown call on the field. One can assume there was no quick whistle. Fans are somewhat more willing to accept a blown call on the field.

It looks like a blown decision by Command Centre. It seems fans are not so willing to accept a blown call at CC. In baseball, it seems a review can show rather clearly whether a player was safe at first base. Tie to the runner.

(By the way, what happened to that rule that the ground could not cause a fumble? Is that still in place? Irrelevant to this situation as the ball was stripped.)

On TV, one can see the ball coming out before Harris' butt hits the ground.

On a bang, bang play, determined by milliseconds, it can be very hard to make the original call. Then it comes down to how much clarity can be determined by a review.

Until this fan knows in detail what happened at CC, he will refrain from ripping them. What are their protocols? What happened in the room? As noted, if the ball came loose a millisecond earlier, would CC have overturned the call on the field? Too close to overturn?

Blown call by CC? Stuff happens. For a call on the field, or at Command Centre, mistakes can happen. On to the next game.