Was it a touchdown?

[JiriHrdina]

In the Sun today they mention the fact that Dunnigan even gave the refs a heads up before the play that they would be trying an on-side kick. Pretty stupid that even with this knowledge they blew the call.

But AvengeR is right - long-term this was probably better for the Stamps to ensure the first pick. Which this year means a lot with that Canadian RB putting up insane numbers (his name escapes me).

[AvengeR]

That Rb is from Hamilton, so if the Ticats want him badly, we could try to pry Hitchcock from them.

[troutman]

Did anyone else think BC's second TD was questionable? I thought Cutolo was still juggling the ball as he went out of the back of the end zone.

[calf]

Originally posted by troutman@Oct 23 2004, 05:27 PM
Did anyone else think BC's second TD was questionable? I thought Cutolo was still juggling the ball as he went out of the back of the end zone.

Yup...he may have had 1 foot in bounds while juggling it...but I'm not too sure about that.

[McG]

Originally posted by Bertuzzied@Oct 23 2004, 05:18 AM
to be honest i don't think the stupid refs know the rule so i don't think any of them were looking for the onside guy.

Wouldn't it awesome if they somehow reversed this? hmm i'm still dreaming the flames won the cup in 6.

you're not dreaming.

they did.

[McG]

Originally posted by JiriHrdina@Oct 23 2004, 08:54 PM
In the Sun today they mention the fact that Dunnigan even gave the refs a heads up before the play that they would be trying an on-side kick. Pretty stupid that even with this knowledge they blew the call.

But AvengeR is right - long-term this was probably better for the Stamps to ensure the first pick. Which this year means a lot with that Canadian RB putting up insane numbers (his name escapes me).

Neil Lumsden's son.

i think he plays at mcmaster which is where ti-cats coach is from IIRC...

[McG]

Originally posted by calf@Oct 23 2004, 06:12 AM
100% a td - just saw the replay...Sanford was onside by about 2 yards. Thank god instant replay's coming in next year...hopefully the video judges are at least half way competent. Good thing this was a nothing game too.

I doubt Dunigan's appeal will go anywhere...you know that the league won't want to set any kind of precedent there.

Team showed some guts in the 2nd half..and heart. Looking forward to next season!

Even when they get the video replay...some joker in TO tells us that they "tivo'd" it and it wasn't a goal. oh wait. stamps forum... i mean...it was a touchdown! hehheh

[flames_1987]

In the Hearld today they show the pic, and its fully conclusive. My pro line ticket had the stamps winning, and then some for sure NFL teams. Not that bad of a payoff, if all those NFL teams win today I'm gonna lose it even more.

O well, we defintley have something to look forward to next year!!

[pope04]

TD or not, I loved the fire in Dunigan's eye after the game. I listened to Mark Stephen's interview with him on QR, and he was livid. I think this bodes well for next season - 2005 will be awesome.

[McG]

in my sports watching (extensive) and playing (extremely limited hehheh) career, i have learned never ever to underestimate a slighted or angry team...

which, as '04 says...only bodes well for the future.

[JBR]

Originally posted by Bertuzzied@Oct 23 2004, 05:12 AM

the guy who threw the flag was down on the 5 yard line! pathetic! Scott Coe is even more pathetic for not stopping that guy on 3rd and 24.

kudos to dunnigan for calling that play. or was it Khari that called the play?

In defense of this official, the flag should be thrown in ALL cases. After the play is dead, the officials get together to discuss. If it was rules correctly, then there would have been "no infraction on the play". Whether the player was on-side is not his call. The umpire or line judges should have made the call.