The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Talk about the Canadian Football League

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
CFL in Quebec
All Star
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 1:38 pm

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by CFL in Quebec » Tue Sep 08, 2009 4:25 pm

SectionW wrote:
B.C.FAN wrote:
SectionW wrote:That was a BS call, the defender played the ball and did not touch Jackson, that is called great coverage. legitimate no way. Just take your orange glasses off that helps with the vision.
It was right in font of me and the defender had his right arm around Jackson and pulled on him, impeding his progress. A penalty is a penalty. How about the one on Ryan Phillips in the end zone in Montreal last year that set up the Als' winning touchdown? It looked like a BS call to me but I was watching on TV. I'll defer to your judgment if you saw it live.
saw it on PVR slow mo from 3 angles, and no it was not, way better than single angle at a distance in the stadium. Try watching again.
:whs:
That was great coverage peroid.

Gerry
Champion
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 4:47 pm
Location: Surrey, BC

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Gerry » Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:29 pm

CFL in Quebec wrote:
SectionW wrote:
B.C.FAN wrote:
SectionW wrote:That was a BS call, the defender played the ball and did not touch Jackson, that is called great coverage. legitimate no way. Just take your orange glasses off that helps with the vision.
It was right in font of me and the defender had his right arm around Jackson and pulled on him, impeding his progress. A penalty is a penalty. How about the one on Ryan Phillips in the end zone in Montreal last year that set up the Als' winning touchdown? It looked like a BS call to me but I was watching on TV. I'll defer to your judgment if you saw it live.
saw it on PVR slow mo from 3 angles, and no it was not, way better than single angle at a distance in the stadium. Try watching again.
:whs:
That was great coverage peroid.
Since you're such a great observer of the game and are debating calls other than the one that occurred at the end of the game, what do you think about the one touchdown the Als did score?

Should it have been called back for the hold at about the 15 yard line?

User avatar
Ravi Ramkissoonsingh
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9155
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 6:42 pm
Favourite Team: Toronto Argonauts
Location: St Catharines, Ontario

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Ravi Ramkissoonsingh » Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:41 pm

redwhite2005 wrote:The Stamps when losing to the Lions after getting a winning touchdown from an onside kick that Jake the snake screwed up could not get anything out of the league. that mistake pushed Calgary out of the playoffs. So I would bet that Montreal has next to no chance of getting anything out of the protest.
Just to clarify, Calgary was already out of the playoff hunt when they "lost" that infamous game to B.C. back in '04. The Lions had already clinched first place in the west too so that game was totally meaningless to the standings - fortunately. Having said that, it was a shame for the Stamps and Matt Dunigan to lose that game that way.
There is one thing that no Argo fan should ever forget - Rob Ford, Doug Ford, Paul Godfrey, Phil Lind and Larry Tanenbaum are all pure evil!

User avatar
SectionW
2017 MVP
2017 MVP
Posts: 15171
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 3:12 pm
Location: Right in front of the Beerlin Wall, next to the Kaiser
Contact:

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by SectionW » Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:56 pm

Gerry wrote:
CFL in Quebec wrote:
SectionW wrote:
B.C.FAN wrote:
SectionW wrote:That was a BS call, the defender played the ball and did not touch Jackson, that is called great coverage. legitimate no way. Just take your orange glasses off that helps with the vision.
It was right in font of me and the defender had his right arm around Jackson and pulled on him, impeding his progress. A penalty is a penalty. How about the one on Ryan Phillips in the end zone in Montreal last year that set up the Als' winning touchdown? It looked like a BS call to me but I was watching on TV. I'll defer to your judgment if you saw it live.
saw it on PVR slow mo from 3 angles, and no it was not, way better than single angle at a distance in the stadium. Try watching again.
:whs:
That was great coverage peroid.
Since you're such a great observer of the game and are debating calls other than the one that occurred at the end of the game, what do you think about the one touchdown the Als did score?

Should it have been called back for the hold at about the 15 yard line?
Do you want to review all the bad calls that went BC's way in this game Gerry? and the number of weird calls i have seen at BC place? be it Als or many other team, Esk PI in 2006 comes to mind.
May the Cahoon be with you.
Montreal Alouettes Fan Site

Gerry
Champion
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 4:47 pm
Location: Surrey, BC

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Gerry » Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:42 pm

SectionW wrote:
Gerry wrote:
CFL in Quebec wrote:
SectionW wrote:
B.C.FAN wrote:
SectionW wrote:That was a BS call, the defender played the ball and did not touch Jackson, that is called great coverage. legitimate no way. Just take your orange glasses off that helps with the vision.
It was right in font of me and the defender had his right arm around Jackson and pulled on him, impeding his progress. A penalty is a penalty. How about the one on Ryan Phillips in the end zone in Montreal last year that set up the Als' winning touchdown? It looked like a BS call to me but I was watching on TV. I'll defer to your judgment if you saw it live.
saw it on PVR slow mo from 3 angles, and no it was not, way better than single angle at a distance in the stadium. Try watching again.
:whs:
That was great coverage peroid.
Since you're such a great observer of the game and are debating calls other than the one that occurred at the end of the game, what do you think about the one touchdown the Als did score?

Should it have been called back for the hold at about the 15 yard line?
Do you want to review all the bad calls that went BC's way in this game Gerry? and the number of weird calls i have seen at BC place? be it Als or many other team, Esk PI in 2006 comes to mind.
No. What bad calls that went BC's way? Calls that you think are bad and went BC's way? Sure. If someone wanted to, we could. I still have the game on PVR. But,I doubt that we would get anywhere.

I'm just asking about that one play for your ONLY touchdown. The one in the first half. Do you think it should have been called back? Since you guys are already talking about other plays, but cherry-picking the plays.

And, on the one you think you scored in the second half, did you see the tackle on Johnson, or did that escape you? Do you honestly feel that you deserved a touch down there? Given the hold? I have heard that there was a flag and that it was going against BC for lining up offside, but, if the play was not whistled down and all the penalties on the play applied, the Als would have been in a worse position (3rd and 6 with offsetting penalties) than they ended up in, at 3 and 1 over again

Had the Als made it on the subsequent play, or held the Lions when they were in a 3rd and 1 position themselves with about 30 seconds left to play, would you be bringing this up now?

I've seen the Lions have TDs called back on controversial calls before. The pain of it goes away if the Lions score on the same series, or the next play, and all is forgotten. Als should have done the same.

User avatar
SectionW
2017 MVP
2017 MVP
Posts: 15171
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 3:12 pm
Location: Right in front of the Beerlin Wall, next to the Kaiser
Contact:

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by SectionW » Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:49 am

Deserved the TD wow, i guess i should back down because i do not feel we deserve it, maybe you missed the face mask on the same play, or your offside on the same paly maybe the offside is what forced the hold. BC were given 2 points, that you like or not, they were given to you by Higgins action, not base on the play on the field, deal with it.
May the Cahoon be with you.
Montreal Alouettes Fan Site

B.C.FAN
All Star
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by B.C.FAN » Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:47 am

SectionW wrote:Deserved the TD wow, i guess i should back down because i do not feel we deserve it, maybe you missed the face mask on the same play, or your offside on the same paly maybe the offside is what forced the hold. BC were given 2 points, that you like or not, they were given to you by Higgins action, not base on the play on the field, deal with it.
Now you're just whining. Maybe the Als could outplay B.C. for once so you wouldn't need to complain about the referees. The Als were lucky to be within a touchdown at the end of that game, given B.C.'s 26-15 edge in first downs and Martell Mallett's 213 rushing yards. Try stopping that instead of blaming the officials.

Last year in Montreal the Lions outpassed the Als 406 yards to 231 but B.C. turnovers kept the game close and a controversial pass interference penalty on Ryan Phillips in the end zone in the final two minutes set up Montreal's winning touchdown. The breaks go both ways.

The fact is that B.C. usually outplays Montreal. That's why the Lions have a wide edge in victories in their past 10 meetings. Sunday's rematch should be a good one, with both teams pumped up. Enjoy it.

User avatar
Rammer
2017 MVP
2017 MVP
Posts: 19645
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 8:42 pm
Location: Look over your left shoulder and I will be on the right side.

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Rammer » Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:28 am

SectionW wrote:Deserved the TD wow, i guess i should back down because i do not feel we deserve it, maybe you missed the face mask on the same play, or your offside on the same paly maybe the offside is what forced the hold. BC were given 2 points, that you like or not, they were given to you by Higgins action, not base on the play on the field, deal with it.
After all has been said and done, I wish that the Als had scored on the TD at the time, as it left plenty of time for the Lions to gain enough field position for a FG attempt to win it. To me the call was game altering to either side, it is just that the Als didn't take advantage of their opportunity, as they could have gained the FD and then moved on to a TD running out the play clock, perhaps even tried a two point convert to win the game. To suggest that the play won the game for the Lions is a stretch, but as the Lions adjusted to the call and won the game, I would say that the Als had every opportunity to do so even after the call.

Do I like the fact that it happened the way it did, absolutely not, I don't think anyone does, but with 54 seconds remaining in CFL time, that leaves a ton of game still on the field.
MY CFL INCLUDES THE OTTAWA RENEGADES!

User avatar
Rammer
2017 MVP
2017 MVP
Posts: 19645
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 8:42 pm
Location: Look over your left shoulder and I will be on the right side.

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Rammer » Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:33 pm

http://communities.canada.com/theprovin ... est.aspx[i]
CFL denies Als protest

By L. Ullrich 09-09-2009

Filed under: BC Lions CFL

Yes, well, so much for that $5,000 protest.
The CFL officially put an end to the hysteria associated with the outfall from an upheld protest by denying Wednesday the petition from the Montreal Alouettes to have the end of their game with the Lions last week replayed.
Here's the full text of the decision by commissioner Mark Cohon:
--


As you may know, the Montreal Alouettes submitted an official game protest to me in relation to the Canadian Football League game held in Vancouver on Friday, September 4, 2009.

The protest relates to a sequence of events surrounding a play late in the game in which Montreal appeared to score a touchdown. This play was subsequently called back by the referee and replayed. On the replay, Montreal failed to obtain a first down and turned the ball over to B.C. on downs. B.C. went on to win the game by a score of 19-12.

An official game protest falls within the scope of Section 2 of the CFL By-Laws. Section 2, Paragraph 1 of the CFL By-Laws provides that:

1. If a member Club, knowing a player is ineligible under the Constitution, By-laws or Rules and Regulations of the League, permits said player to participate in a game or if a game official intentionally misinterprets or misapplies a playing rule, which participation or misinterpretation or misapplication could reasonably have affected the result of the game, a protest against the result may be made.

This paragraph directs the standard of my review, which has been extensive. I reviewed the television footage of the play in question, and surrounding events, as provided by the official TSN broadcast, other camera angles provided by TSN but not part of the official TSN broadcast, and the in-stadium game film provided to the league office and all Member Clubs by B.C., according to normal practice.

I also conducted separate interviews with several of the officials involved in the game in question, including the Instant Replay Official, Game Supervisor, Referee, Field Judge, Back Judge and Umpire. I also conducted an interview with representatives from the Montreal Alouettes, to fully understand the nature of their protest.

I have determined that the facts relevant to this matter are as follows:

• Play number 145 concluded with 1:05 remaining on the official game clock.
• The official game clock commenced prior to play number 146, but was subsequently stopped when B.C. called a time-out. Following the time-out, the stadium game clock showed 0.58 remaining.
• The Referee asked that the stadium game clock be reset to 1:00.
• The Game Supervisor and Instant Replay Official discussed whether the game clock should have been reset to 1:05, being the time play number 145 concluded, and agreed that there was sufficient uncertainty that it should be reviewed by the referee.
• The Game Supervisor sent an electronic page to the four on-field officials equipped with pagers, including the referee, to request that the game be stopped to review the timing issue.
• The four on-field officials received the pages contemporaneously with, or immediately prior to, the snap of the ball on play number 146.
• No whistles were blown or arm signals made during the course of play number 146.
• Following the conclusion of play number 146, several whistles were blown by the on-field officials to indicate an issue and an on-field meeting of the officials was immediately convened.
• During the on-field meeting, the four officials equipped with pagers confirmed that they each had received a page contemporaneously with, or immediately prior to, the snap of the ball.
• During the on-field meeting, several on-field officials indicated that they had blown their whistles. However, there was a lack of precision as to when such whistles were blown.
The referee concluded that play number 146 had been ruled dead, and ordered it to be replayed.
In order for this protest to be successful, it must be shown that there was an intentional misinterpretation or misapplication of a playing rule. A mistake, notwithstanding the severe effect it may have upon the outcome of a game, does not provide sufficient grounds for the Commissioner to allow the protest and determine a remedy.


In the matter at hand, it is my conclusion that three significant errors occurred. First, the game supervisor sent an electronic page to the on-field officials too late for the matter to be addressed prior to the snap of the ball. Second, the on-field officials failed to blow their whistles and indicate a dead ball immediately upon receiving the electronic page. Third, the referee failed to accurately determine whether the whistles blown by the on-field officials were done so prior to the conclusion of the play. However, it is only the third error which negatively affected Montreal.

It can be concluded that the third error may reasonably have affected the outcome of the game. If it had not occurred, the Montreal touchdown would have stood and the game would most likely have been tied with less than one minute remaining in regulation time. This is unfortunate, and extremely regrettable.

However, despite the significant negative implications resulting from this error, it is my conclusion upon my thorough review that this error was not made by the referee intentionally. The referee believed at the time that a whistle had been blown by an on-field official prior to the conclusion of the play. He communicated this to the game supervisor and the instant replay official following play number 146 and, based on this erroneous belief, made the decision to replay the play in question. This demonstrated a lack of clear communication between the game officials, and a lack of judgment, under pressure, but was not an intentional misinterpretation or misapplication of a playing rule. For this reason, it is my decision that the result of the regular season game between Montreal and B.C. held in Vancouver on Friday, September 4, 2009 stand as a B.C. victory by the score of 19-12.

No discipline is contemplated for the officials involved, but my review will be factored into the assessment of the officials involved, and such assessments are used to determine future assignments. While we can never eliminate human error in the game of football, how it is played or how it is officiated, we are considering measures to ensure this particular set of circumstances is not repeated. Specifically, we will engage the CFL's Competition Committee to consider improved protocols around when a Game Supervisor may contact an on-field official in the course of a game, stricter guidelines for on-field officials when contacted by a Game Supervisor, and formal procedures for Referees to follow before nullifying a play.

The integrity of our game is paramount to our fans. And while they know that perfection is not attainable, they are entitled to know that everyone associated with our game strives to conduct themselves with integrity. I can assure them that my review has concluded that while errors were made, they were not in any way intentional. I can also assure them the Montreal Alouettes' official protest is something we take very seriously, the review that has been conducted has been very thorough, and that our regret at this incident is deep and profound.[/i]
MY CFL INCLUDES THE OTTAWA RENEGADES!

User avatar
Als Fan Ottawa 1
Starter
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm
Favourite Team: Montreal Alouettes
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Als Fan Ottawa 1 » Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:52 am

Ah well, will just have to beat em by 30 or 40 points this week.
CALGARY 09: Redemption could not be sweeter in Calgary. GO ALS GO!

User avatar
wildthing1971
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5609
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:04 pm
Favourite Team: Saskatchewan Roughriders
Location: Evil Empire (Edmonton)
Contact:

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by wildthing1971 » Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:29 am

not really surprised by the decision but disappointed a little. The teams and players get fined and suspended for less, but a huge mistake by the officials that took away a potential game winning score gets brushed off with no faulting to the officials.
when is the last time you got paid to drink coffee coffee? Ask me about healthy coffee its good stuff. www.healthyforyoucoffee.com

User avatar
SectionW
2017 MVP
2017 MVP
Posts: 15171
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 3:12 pm
Location: Right in front of the Beerlin Wall, next to the Kaiser
Contact:

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by SectionW » Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:13 am

wildthing1971 wrote:not really surprised by the decision but disappointed a little. The teams and players get fined and suspended for less, but a huge mistake by the officials that took away a potential game winning score gets brushed off with no faulting to the officials.
:whs:
Cohon held back big time in this case and even defended to a degree the refs, only saying that will be part of their evaluation, Higgins/Ireland should get some public flack. Cohon took the right decision, but no matter what it is bad optics, hope they solve their communication issues. BC got away with a freebee on this one.
May the Cahoon be with you.
Montreal Alouettes Fan Site

User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Superstar
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 3:36 pm
Location: Port Moody - BC

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by Sir Purrcival » Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:58 am

Als Fan Ottawa 1 wrote:Ah well, will just have to beat em by 30 or 40 points this week.

Exactly. Win the next one and the sting of this will all be done. It really is pointless to say what could have been or should have been. We Lions fans all admit that the Al's got jobbed on this one but if the shoe had been on the other foot, the outcome would have been the same. I'm not even sure the officials did anything wrong. We are talking a matter of 2 or 3 seconds which made the difference between the officials clearly stopping the play and not. When you are talking about those kinds of time-lines, it is a wonder stuff like this doesn't happen more often. It was a mistake, it can't be undone and in the end, all you can do is tuck it away and move on.
Last edited by Sir Purrcival on Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lest We Forget!

User avatar
David
All Star
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by David » Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:40 am

SectionW wrote:
wildthing1971 wrote:not really surprised by the decision but disappointed a little. The teams and players get fined and suspended for less, but a huge mistake by the officials that took away a potential game winning score gets brushed off with no faulting to the officials.
:whs:
Cohon held back big time in this case and even defended to a degree the refs, only saying that will be part of their evaluation, Higgins/Ireland should get some public flack. Cohon took the right decision, but no matter what it is bad optics, hope they solve their communication issues. BC got away with a freebee on this one.
Free what? While I sympathize with your plight, I resent the implication that the Als would have the game last Friday night. At best they would have tied it up with a minute left. Even when the Lions got the ball back the Als could have forced a 2 and out and still had time on the clock.

Lions fans had a legitmate beef with the "hometown" end-zone pass interference call on Ryan Phillips last year (I was in Montreal for that one and, sitting on about the 10 yard line, I couldn't believe the call which put the ball down on the one). Still, we marched down the field and should have punched it in ourselves in the dying seconds but instead credited the Als defense and blamed our own play calling for the loss. Not the ref's bad call.

DH
Vancouver's like a bowl of cereal: what ain't fruits or nuts is flakes.

User avatar
SectionW
2017 MVP
2017 MVP
Posts: 15171
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 3:12 pm
Location: Right in front of the Beerlin Wall, next to the Kaiser
Contact:

Re: The 1:00 Als/Lions Debacle Explained

Post by SectionW » Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:52 pm

David wrote:
SectionW wrote:
wildthing1971 wrote:not really surprised by the decision but disappointed a little. The teams and players get fined and suspended for less, but a huge mistake by the officials that took away a potential game winning score gets brushed off with no faulting to the officials.
:whs:
Cohon held back big time in this case and even defended to a degree the refs, only saying that will be part of their evaluation, Higgins/Ireland should get some public flack. Cohon took the right decision, but no matter what it is bad optics, hope they solve their communication issues. BC got away with a freebee on this one.
Free what? While I sympathize with your plight, I resent the implication that the Als would have the game last Friday night. At best they would have tied it up with a minute left. Even when the Lions got the ball back the Als could have forced a 2 and out and still had time on the clock.

Lions fans had a legitmate beef with the "hometown" end-zone pass interference call on Ryan Phillips last year (I was in Montreal for that one and, sitting on about the 10 yard line, I couldn't believe the call which put the ball down on the one). Still, we marched down the field and should have punched it in ourselves in the dying seconds but instead credited the Als defense and blamed our own play calling for the loss. Not the ref's bad call.

DH
You avoided having to fight the last minute out, that is a freebee, resent it all you want, it is the way cookie crumbles.
May the Cahoon be with you.
Montreal Alouettes Fan Site

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests