WESTERN FINALS: Riders vs STAMPEDERS - Page 25 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

speede5 · 11-22-2010, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arloiginla

b) they have no hockey team to grow up cheering for over there

Now that's just mean.

PeteLFan · 11-22-2010, 04:49 PM

For all the Rider fans that think we didn't do anything on offence, look at the stats you didn't either, it was the refs who punched the ball into the endzone for you all 3 times.

You always think things will be different, but the league always screws you over. The players, and fans don't deserve that crap. Fans braved a -25 weather to sit there and watch, the players played in tough conditions battling and fighting for every inch of that field, and then the refs just go and hand it one sided, complete crap.

Once the CFL is gone, sakatchewan will have nothing to cheer for.

PeteLFan · 11-22-2010, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speede5

So they were right, and wrong?

I don't know if the watermelon is squeezing the heads of Riders fans too hard, but please understand this about the rule. The ruling on the field was a fumble, and unless you can find conclusive evidence, which we have yet too see you cannot over turn that call, its against the rules.

IceMan · 11-22-2010, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speede5

So they were right, and wrong?

When it takes that long to review a play, it should be ruled as inconclusive and the call on the field should stand.

Don't know where I said they were right and wrong.

speede5 · 11-22-2010, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceMan xMVPx

When it takes that long to review a play, it should be ruled as inconclusive and the call on the field should stand.

Don't know where I said they were right and wrong.

Well you said you have no issue with them taking as long as they need to in order to make the right call, which is what they did.

Erick Estrada · 11-23-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speede5

Well you said you have no issue with them taking as long as they need to in order to make the right call, which is what they did.

It's still debateable if they made the right call. The call on the field was fumble. They have to have indisputable evidence that the player was down before the ball came out. I've seen the clips over and over. It's impossible to say either way as it was so close. Therefore the play on the field should stand.

Being a biased Stamps fan I honestly can't tell if the ball came out before or after he was down. I believe the review took so long because the CFL couldn't tell either. IMO they went with a gut call not what the video evidence. I'm over it but I'm not watching the Grey Cup on Sunday as I'll be watching NFL instead as I just can't take the CFL seriously as a professional sports league. I've had enough of the bush league officiating week in week out determining the outcome of football games.

Mazrim · 11-23-2010, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speede5

Well you said you have no issue with them taking as long as they need to in order to make the right call, which is what they did.

You think something changed in the last few minutes in looking at the review for the 100th time that made them change their minds?

I was following this thread and riderfans thread as well during the game and the talk during the review on both sides were talking about how if it takes that long, it should be inconclusive. Obviously opinions change after the game, but my thought was that nothing could have possibly appeared different that you wouldn't have noticed in the first minute or two.

speede5 · 11-23-2010, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mazrim

You think something changed in the last few minutes in looking at the review for the 100th time that made them change their minds?

No I think they were pretty sure right off the bat and didn't want to blow it so they checked it a few more times. The review only took 5 minutes from the flag being thrown to the ref announcing the call. Hardly an eternity, and only given the intensity of the game did it seem like forever.

I wasn't that confident going in to the replay but the players knew right away and that usually means something.

Besides, none of us are officials, trained and equipped to make these calls. The pros did their job and that's what they are paid for.

It was a tight game, but that wasn't the only chance Calgary had to put us away. They had lots of good feld position opportunities and they failed to capitalize. Can't blame that on the refs.

troutman · 11-23-2010, 04:46 PM

I wish they looked at the Gelinas shot in 2004 for 10 minutes.

Mazrim · 11-23-2010, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speede5

It was a tight game, but that wasn't the only chance Calgary had to put us away. They had lots of good feld position opportunities and they failed to capitalize. Can't blame that on the refs.

I totally agree, most of the blame for the loss can be put on the Stampeders inability to captialize on their excellent field position. They shot themselves in the foot many times, but at the same time there were some of these calls which made a big difference in what ended up being a tight game.

PeteLFan · 11-23-2010, 06:09 PM

Still pissed of 2 days after the fact. Tom Higgins can stand there and clap on his refs, and talk about emotions, but he was not the one on the field getting screwed he was sitting in a office doing the screwing. Those guys battled the elements, they fought for the chance to be champs, and the refs, higgins, and ireland took over the game.

theonlywhiteout · 11-23-2010, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteLFan

Still pissed of 2 days after the fact. Tom Higgins can stand there and clap on his refs, and talk about emotions, but he was not the one on the field getting screwed he was sitting in a office doing the screwing. Those guys battled the elements, they fought for the chance to be champs, and the refs, higgins, and ireland took over the game.

I dont think the refs took the game over, they simply gave SSK 2nd and 3rd chances calgary didnt get.

If the Stamps handed the ball off to Joffrey more, they would have won. If Burris showed up, they would have have won.

The refs, Burris, and the offensive playcalling are all equally culpable.

JayP · 11-24-2010, 04:55 PM

I really don't get this perception that Burris played awful and Durant was great.

Burris had a 8.16 YPA (yards per attempt) - the best single best statistic for judging quarterbacks (mainly because it ties in yardage, completion%, attempts, completions, etc. into one number). That's a little below his yearly level of 8.85, but in -17C weather your numbers are going to drop. He did have a bad pick, but it was with pressure in his face and expecting a QB to play perfect in that weather is ridiculous.

Meanwhile Durant managed a pathetic 5.00 YPA way down from his yearly level of 8.60. That's absolutely dreadful. For comparison's sake, the brutal Cleo Lemon had a YPA of 7.43 this season.

After looking through the numbers, it's absolutely baffling that people think the Riders played better. The only thing they were better at was time of possession, which is the most overrated stat in football if you don't consider it with other factors. ToP is generally important because more time with the ball usually means more plays which usually means more yardage. But for all the controlling the clock BS the talking heads yammer on about, the Riders still got outgained.

The Riders ran 55 offensive plays for 267 yards - an average of 4.85 yards/play. The Stamps 43 plays for 296 yards - an average of 6.88 yards/play. So the Stamps averaged 2 yards/play more than the Riders, but apparently the Riders offense was better? Sure they scored more touchdowns, but two were after being stopped by the Stamps. It's hardly fair to say the Riders were more productive when they got second chance opportunities the Stamps didn't.

Then you consider the fact that the Stamps had a 66-2 edge in punt return yards (each team with 6 returns). I won't consider kick return yards as those were a product of bogus Rider TDs. So overall the outgained the Riders by almost 100 yards, but we're expected to believe the Riders were the better team?

I guess it's just easy to buy in garbage guys like Rob Kerr and Al Cameron spew in the radio about how the Stamps had more yards, but didn't get the "important yards" which I guess means in the redzone (ignoring the fact that the Riders didn't get those yards without the refs help either).

Cecil Terwilliger · 11-24-2010, 04:59 PM

Did somebody say Durant was great? He was brutal in the 1st quarter and for part of the 2nd quarter.

He wasn't that much better than Burris. Burris wasn't very good though so it didn't take much.

Flickered Flame · 11-24-2010, 05:03 PM

The refs sucked, the Stamps sucked and if the Riders don't pick up their game, because on Sunday they were not very good, they will get smoked in the Grey Cup.

Cecil Terwilliger · 11-24-2010, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flickered Flame

The refs sucked, the Stamps sucked and if the Riders don't pick up their game, because on Sunday they were not very good, they will get smoked in the Grey Cup.

I don't think there is any doubt that Montreal is the better team.

1 game playoffs are always tricky like that.

Beerfest · 11-25-2010, 12:38 AM

First chance ive got to post this here.

Stamps are the better team, no doubt, they took some dumb penalties, but the refs gifted some to the Riders also.

Id love to see where they found conclusive evidence that he was down before the fumble, it took them forever to make the ruling and I didnt see anything conclusive, what a joke.

That taunting penalty also, are you serious..way to go refs, what a joke..

Also the Riders have tons of bandwagon fans, dont give me this crap about them having the best fans of in the CFL, they thrive on people saying "oh my uncle is from Regina, so im a Riders fan for life"