The Lions have to tighten up on defence. They’ve gone soft and give up too many easy yards and first downs. They’ve allowed an average of over 30 points a game in the second half of the season.
Nearly a 1,000 yards in total offence combined in the last two games — never mind the time of possession. The only glimpse of their earlier season form was when they knew they had to swarm Tre Ford. Other than that it's plenty of soft coverage with Phillips determined not to give up any big plays after the blowout loss in Winnipeg.
Instead it's a steady dose of giving up six to 10 yards at the time and never getting off the field.
Win or lose, we need to figure out our D and Oline. I hope I'm wrong, but we may not make the west final, especially if Harris is back. He loves the quick hitter/ short passing game. Ideal against our soft zone, (giving 10 yard cushion). he'll March up and down the field at will.
We had the whole season to address these issues and they haven't yet. I doubt they will
If Evans is always that sharp coming off the bench maybe the change up could be useful.
Problem is he hasn't looked as sharp coming off the bench in earlier opportunities as he did tonight. He's been somewhat OK. Playing against his old team may have had him more fired up to perform tonight.
Win or lose, we need to figure out our D and Oline. I hope I'm wrong, but we may not make the west final, especially if Harris is back. He loves the quick hitter/ short passing game. Ideal against our soft zone, (giving 10 yard cushion). he'll March up and down the field at will.
If Harris isn't back I don't see the Lions losing to Calgary or the Riders in a big playoff game played in the dome.
Re: Lions at Ticats Oct. 13, 2023
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2023 10:17 pm
by Toppy Vann
Not sure why Vernon Adams got involved in that INT return. Foolish and unnecessary.
The only positive out of that was that Dane Evans got some reps and looked very good.
However, in Hamilton he was hot or cold. Not often enough in between.
JaQuan Hardy was moving left and right a bit too much BUT that's his first game in a long time so I'd cut him some slack.
They opened with Mackie as an extra blocker with Hardy and on one play where he was an outlet pass squaring out 5 yds downfield, he'd have got some very good YAC if the pass was to him. Not sure why they moved away from that as Adams got sacked right after that.
I thought that holding would kill us, but Evans with a quick pass to Hatcher with 1 second left was clutch.
I mentioned this issue a few times before and I'll mention it again given the fact that such an example just occurred.
In ice hockey, there are several incidents in which a goal was scored in the last second of a period so video review was required to see if the puck completely crossed the line before time ended the period.
In basketball, a ball that's in the air when a quarter ends will count if the ball goes through the basket so video review is required to see if the ball left the player's hands before time ended the quarter.
In football, a play that is in progress when a quarter ends is allowed to complete so if it results in a scoring play, it will definitely count so the issue will be whether there was time left with regards to the second-to-last play and tonight's game became such an example and I'm wondering why there isn't more arguing and controversy with regards to such similar plays. In the penultimate play, Hatcher caught a pass with 2 seconds left, immediately went down, and was touched by a Tiger-Cat defender with 1 second left and the whistle blew at that time, but the time went down to 0 but 1 second was re-added and this can be confirmed at 9:58 of this video:
I'd say in a few seasons back in such a play the referee will definitely say the half is over. Such an example occurred in July 12, 2012 with the Alouettes winning 33-32 over Stampeders even though in the last official play, a long pass completion was made by Calgary and the receiver kneeled with 2 seconds left on the clock, but the officials allowed the clock to go down to 0 ending the game instead of allowing the Stampeders a chance to win with a field goal attempt. Here's the game in its entirety and the play in question is at 2:25:16:
One confusion aspect though - if Hatcher was NOT touched by the Hamilton defender, then will the referee let the time go down to 0 or can Hatcher concede himself to be down and if he can, then how? The universal sign of giving up is to take the knee, but Hatcher was lying on his stomach and it could be argued that his going down was as a result of him reaching out for the catch and his momentum brought him down and as such, it wasn't an intentional lying down. So that said, had the defender just waited for just one second later to touch Hatcher, the game would have gone into overtime.
And luckily for the Lions, this was in the CFL as such a play would never happen in the NFL as had it been in the NFL, even the team has timeouts and tries to call time out, the NFL officials would most definitely say the half is over.
Not sure why Vernon Adams got involved in that INT return. Foolish and unnecessary.
At least he wasn't a victim of what former CFL DT James Curry would do whenever there's a turnover as he would immediately make a hard hit on the quarterback which would likely injure the quarterback - with the best such example occurring early in the 1987 season when he did that to then-Argonauts QB John Congemi.
Re: Lions at Ticats Oct. 13, 2023
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2023 11:43 pm
by maxlion
I think it was clear that Hatcher was intending to go down in order to give his team the chance to win the game by a field goal. Even if he wasn't touched, it was a dead ball per the rules. The touch by Lawrence was helpful in confirming that though.
The more controversial part IMO was that Hatcher was clearly offside on the play. I have noticed several incidents in the last 2 weeks where players were offside on critical plays and the refs let it go. Hamilton had one in this game also. Luckily this one went in our favour.
I think it was clear that Hatcher was intending to go down in order to give his team the chance to win the game by a field goal. Even if he wasn't touched, it was a dead ball per the rules.
Is this a new rule that was added in recent years?
I've included both videos above for comparisons and I'm sure you agree that the 2012 game ended in the same circumstances and yet in that game, the referee allowed the clock to go to 0 officially ending the game without allowing the Stampeders one last play for a field goal attempt.
Win or lose, we need to figure out our D and Oline. I hope I'm wrong, but we may not make the west final, especially if Harris is back. He loves the quick hitter/ short passing game. Ideal against our soft zone, (giving 10 yard cushion). he'll March up and down the field at will.
Are we being a bit pessimistic here?
I understand that anything can happen in a playoff game, but we will have home field advantage. We seem to match up well against Calgary,
Harriss hasnt played for over 2 months. The lions have double the wins of Sask 12 to 6. Scored 100 more points and have given up 100 less.
This team is far from perfecrt and if they do advance to theGrey Cup they will need some luck and have to play a near purrfect game. They lack a running game and the D has put an empasia on not giving up the long pass which has opened up the short pass to the flats.
We have a great passig attack and we are just going to have to live with it this year as that is what we are.
I am estatic with a 12 win season, we have won some games we shoild have lost and lost some games we should have won. But at the end of the day we are the 3rd best team in the regular season.
I like our chances and will not let our few flaws ourweigh our many strengths. Like you said we may lose but I like our chances.
I thought that holding would kill us, but Evans with a quick pass to Hatcher with 1 second left was clutch.
My buddy and I watching in a PG pub thought Hatcher was way offside on that one but I'll take it. Downside of this win is I still can't book my flights to the WSF/WDF and Grey Cup.....although I realize the odds of Bombers losing their final 2 are up there with me winning LottoMax.
Just remember me when you win the lotto.
Re: Lions at Ticats Oct. 13, 2023
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2023 7:59 am
by DanoT
I don't expect the Lions to be able to just flip a switch and come up with a running game that has been missing all season. So, screen passes, bubble screens and short passes to Hardy and Cottoy are the answer, imo.
I think it was clear that Hatcher was intending to go down in order to give his team the chance to win the game by a field goal. Even if he wasn't touched, it was a dead ball per the rules.
Is this a new rule that was added in recent years?
I've included both videos above for comparisons and I'm sure you agree that the 2012 game ended in the same circumstances and yet in that game, the referee allowed the clock to go to 0 officially ending the game without allowing the Stampeders one last play for a field goal attempt.
I don't know if the rule changed between 2012 and 2023. From what I can see, there is nothing in the 2023 rules about being touched. Maybe that is just a convention or unofficial holdover from past times?
In the 2023 rules, Rule 1, Section 4 Dead Ball sets out the various circumstances where a ball is ruled dead. In this case, the one that applies is:
The ball is dead when
...
The ball carrier is on the ground and, in the judgment of the official, is not attempting to advance the ball, the official shall immediately declare the ball dead.
This rule does involve the "judgement of the official", which can raise difficulties given how fast things happen. In circumstances such as last night where every second is critical and it can be easily anticipated what the Lions are doing, I think it behooves the officials to ensure that no extra seconds run after the player intentionally goes down. The right judgement would be to immediately declare the ball dead. Just my 2 cents.
