Game 6 - Riders @ Stampeders

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by jammies

Then don't watch the CFL. I think it's "weak" that you get 4 downs in the NFL on a tiny little field where it's more important to be big than athletic, but I don't pollute all the NFL threads with my opinion.

Yes because BIG always equals non-athletic.

Brutal officiating is something the CFL is going to have to start dealing with more harshly or it will always come across as complete bush.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by HOOT

I will never mention it again. But its just an opinion.

I would rather watch College before either the NFL or CFL...but I am not too sure what that would have to do about a rule I didn't like.

Fair enough, I was a little incensed with the stupidity of the Stamps and let that spill over a bit, sorry I was a bit over the top there. Still, the rouge rocks, and the day they take it away they might as well start playing on the NFL field and developing players for the big league...

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yes because BIG always equals non-athletic.

Brutal officiating is something the CFL is going to have to start dealing with more harshly or it will always come across as complete bush.

The problem isn't that big equals non-athletic, the problem is that big is more important than athletic. How many guys, as a percentage, are under 6' 2" in the NFL? Now compare that to the percentage of guys who are shorter than that in the general population, and the huge difference tells you that there are two possibilities: first, it's possible being tall is positively correlated with skill at football; second, and far more likely, your skill pool is greatly circumscribed by the need for the athlete to not only be good at football, but to be big.

As far as the officiating goes, every league has their good and bad officials. It certainly isn't a strength of the CFL, but on the other hand at least none of their guys have been recently sent to prison for cheating the game, like the NBA, or try to make themselves the star of the show, like the NHL.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

What's the difference? It's both.

I think there's a slight difference. If you trained better officials they would be less-inept at messing up the calls such as pass interference, offside, personal fouls etc etc..

But to come up with a decision that a player purposely abused an official, when hardly any player ever does that, especially on the 2nd play of the game. That's just egotistical, stupidity and not thinking of the big picture that athletes are there to play the game and not hitting refs. That's just common sense. All of us watching tv could tell right away it was accidental, why couldn't they?

[flip]

Despite the fact that the Cates TD may not have been a catch (and hence not a fumble) the Mike Washington catch in the 4th looked like he had control before losing the ball by a fumble that the ground appeared to cause.

The ensuing drive (Riders had to punt) and Stamps scored a TD. If the Riders challenge they may have put the game out of reach right there.

BTW I was in Regina this weekend and watched the game with some friends and family and I have to say that city is in a fervor right now. We stopped by the Riders Store on Sat. afternoon and that place was packed. Even on the way back today people in Swift Current were talking to me about the Riders.

[calculoso]

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/C...48191-sun.html

Higgins explained the decision to eject Armour was made by veteran head referee Jake Ireland after conferring with an official who said he saw the contact, threw the flag and ruled it intentional.

"(Ireland) has no other option at that point -- there are no recourses for him. He can't go to replay," said Higgins, who added the offending official will face disciplinary action.

"That individual won't be named as it's hard enough to attract young officials to the game without persecuting them publicly. But we'll let our clubs know how it will be handled internally."

There you go. Officials do get disciplined but not named for obvious reasons. Same thing happens in all leagues (NHL, NBA, NFL, etc).

[OzSome]

Originally Posted by calculoso

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/C...48191-sun.html


There you go. Officials do get disciplined but not named for obvious reasons. Same thing happens in all leagues (NHL, NBA, NFL, etc).

They wouldn't even mention the guy's name. How do we know that they really discipline the guy? I will believe it if I see it.

The only good thing about this thing was Higgins admitted it right away that the referee made a mistake BUT that wouldn't change a thing now because Armour missed the game and the Stamps lost. I am not saying not having Armour in the lineup caused us a game but he sure would have help stopping Wes Cates running free. I know it's done with but I am hoping next time the referee will think twice before he make a drastic decision.

[cSpooge]

Originally Posted by OzSome

They wouldn't even mention the guy's name. How do we know that they really discipline the guy? I will believe it if I see it.

The only good thing about this thing was Higgins admitted it right away that the referee made a mistake BUT that wouldn't change a thing now because Armour missed the game and the Stamps lost. I am not saying not having Armour in the lineup caused us a game but he sure would have help stopping Wes Cates running free. I know it's done with but I am hoping next time the referee will think twice before he make a drastic decision.

Leagues almost never publish the name of officials who get disciplined unless it is obvious as to which official was at fault (i.e. soccer/basketball).

[killer_carlson]

before people crap on the refs, do you guys know what they get paid?

It is so low, that it is essentially a volunteer endeavour.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

before people crap on the refs, do you guys know what they get paid?

It is so low, that it is essentially a volunteer endeavour.

I think that's exactly it. Back in high school I saw a ref officiating my game, and then again on the field the ensuing weekend reffing a CFL game. The league doesn't pay these guys full time coin to warrant the kind of professional development required to eliminate poor calls to the standard of say the NFL. Now that they have replay I've noticed that the number of botched calls that impact the game to a great extent have diminished greatly. There's still botched calls, but it's more manageable now. Plus once you pay refs $75k-100K a year, they start to make more than a majority of the players and the players union might take exception to that and make things more difficult on the labour front.

[worth]

Being a CFL ref is a part time job. I'm pretty sure it's a part time job in the NFl as well, but salaries are much better. The refs do this job because they love the game, just like the players. Not to mention football is probably the most technically difficult game to ref.

I don't think the reffing this year has been all that bad. I think it's been better than years past. The stamps had a lot of penalties because they did stupid things to deserve penalties. The Armour thing is the glaring contradiction.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by calculoso

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/C...48191-sun.html



There you go. Officials do get disciplined but not named for obvious reasons. Same thing happens in all leagues (NHL, NBA, NFL, etc).

That official should get fired, no question about it. An apology is not enough.

[Devils'Advocate]

Fired smired. To get quality officiating you need to pay for quality officiating. Otherwise this guy gets fired and they bring in someone twice as bad next week. The CFL has improved its officiating since last year, but this call... this call.... it just sunk all the progress down the toilet. And I'm an ARGOS FAN!!!! I shouldn't give a .... but I do. It's an embarrassment to the league... they need to find a way to continue the improvement and I think the #1 way to attract good people willing to invest more time in training and development (ie knowing where the hell you are supposed to stand) is to pay them more.

Secondly, in such an important game, and with such an important player and a 25 yard penalty, why can't the head official give a quick peek at the replay? "It slows down the game"? I'd rather them take the time to make the correct call.

And last - the Cates touchdown that Domingez dropped.... I don't think Domingez had control of the ball. *Reviews thread* I see others have mentioned that.... but I was yelling that that was coming back as soon as Cates was in the end zone. There is no way that he had the ball long enough for it to be considered a catch. Not throwing the challenge flag - that's on the coach.

[calculoso]

Nice discussion on officiating:

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/C...65901-sun.html

Either way, CFL officials who are paid between $700 and $1,000 a game -- plus expenses -- are subject to training camps, film work, exams, fitness levels and professionalism. just like the NFL's crew of part-timers.

"My NFL counterpart is absolutely amazed at the competency of the officials here with the field being so big and the unlimited motion and the additional player on the field," said Higgins, pointing out the NFL has 24 cameras at every game to use for replays compared to TSN's 10.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Nice discussion on officiating:

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/C...65901-sun.html

Yes but the NFL also has a better way of addressing controversial calls. Mike Pereira (Higgins' counterpart) comes on the NFL Network every Tuesday to discuss controversial calls and why they should or shouldn't have been made. I do agree that CFL officials have it harder because of the larger field, etc., but why not make it easier by having one or two more guys in stripes on the field?

[worth]

CFL did something like that last year where Black would answer emails on controversial calls through the CFL website every week. Not sure if their still doing that this year or not.

[JD]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

There is no way that he had the ball long enough for it to be considered a catch. Not throwing the challenge flag - that's on the coach.

Well not really. The play was in the last 3 minutes, meaning it had to be called down from the replay booth.

But as mentioned somewhere in the thread, Huf probably should have thrown his flag anyway. At the very least, delay the game enough to give the replay officials a moment to see the play again or at least second-guess the way it was called.

It was a huge momentum swing and an important enough play that Huf should have at least stamped his feet and thrown a hissy fit of some sort.

[cSpooge]

Originally Posted by JD

Well not really. The play was in the last 3 minutes, meaning it had to be called down from the replay booth.

But as mentioned somewhere in the thread, Huf probably should have thrown his flag anyway. At the very least, delay the game enough to give the replay officials a moment to see the play again or at least second-guess the way it was called.

It was a huge momentum swing and an important enough play that Huf should have at least stamped his feet and thrown a hissy fit of some sort.

the problem being that it is a penalty to do so.