Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 161 to 170 of 170
  1. #161
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 39,537, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 29.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdrive25000 Experience Points
    AngeloV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Thornhill
    Posts
    11,810
    Points
    39,537
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by paulwoods13 View Post
    Getting out of the way is just about impossible. You're running with a guy at full speed when he suddenly slows down or stops -- it will take you a second or two to adjust and by that time you have likely run into him.
    I've always hated PI on a poorly underthrown ball. The fact of the matter is the contact is generated by the receiver when he stops.
    It's us vs the rest of the country

  2. #162
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 54,997, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    ArgoRavi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    8,650
    Points
    54,997
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by doubleblue View Post
    It's like an accidental trip in Hockey. You didn't mean to do it but you still get penalized. Murray it throw his hand up but didn't block the receiver's sight as far as I could see, but he didn't look back to try and find the ball. IMO that is why the official threw the flag, for face guarding. Border line call by the "eye in the sky". Just like the Masoli fumble.
    To be clear, the official didn't throw a flag. The replay official overturned the non-call. As far as the Masoli play went, IMO it was incredibly clear that he fumbled before his arm was in any kind of forward throwing motion. That was just a terrible, terrible game-changing call and I am still ticked off about it.
    Chad Kelly + Dan Adeboboye + David Ungerer + Damonte Coxie + DaVaris Daniels + Dejon Brissett = Unstoppable Force

  3. #163
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 26,888, Level: 97
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 462
    Overall activity: 84.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Stratford
    Posts
    5,555
    Points
    26,888
    Level
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by ArgoRavi View Post
    To be clear, the official didn't throw a flag. The replay official overturned the non-call. As far as the Masoli play went, IMO it was incredibly clear that he fumbled before his arm was in any kind of forward throwing motion. That was just a terrible, terrible game-changing call and I am still ticked off about it.
    If the replay official gets the Masoli call correct, we aren't even discussing the Murray "PI" on that uncatchable pass. Duane Forde was ticked off a both those calls too.

  4. #164
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 16,835, Level: 82
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 15
    Overall activity: 21.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    argolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,614
    Points
    16,835
    Level
    82
    I'm at the point where I'd like to see penalty challenges eliminated. If the official makes a bad call, so be it. I'm used to that, and that bothers me less than a penalty being called or reversed on appeal, even if it helps my team.

    I think the Masoli play is a result of the "egregious" standard they put in this year, which seems like a response to the NHL's standard for offside challenges where they called off goals even if a play was an inch offside. The Als got burned by that earlier this year when they caused a fumble right near the goal line but it wasn't reversed because in the league's opinion it wasn't egregious enough (an inch instead of a mile).

  5. #165
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 33,273, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6,747
    Points
    33,273
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by gilthethrill View Post
    If the replay official gets the Masoli call correct, we aren't even discussing the Murray "PI" on that uncatchable pass. Duane Forde was ticked off a both those calls too.

    PI rules/interpretations have been tinkered with over the years; the whole "uncatchable" thing I get for borderline interference calls - no way the receiver would have caught the ball. But still - IMO - interference is interference; if a DB tackles or trips a receiver while in his route, and before or during the QB throwing motion, I don't care if the ball lands 15 rows up in the stands, it was still PI - you should not be able to purposely hinder a receiver from his route (other than a "jam" in the first 5 yards - as the rule stands now), and especially with the ball in the air and the receiver trying to go for it - bumping into the receiver, running threw him, etc. And if the receiver stops in his route to adjust for the ball - the DB just gets to run threw him with no PI ? - er, no; look back for the ball and make a play on it yourself, and the DB can claim he has a right to the ball, and bumping into a stopped receiver should then be ok.

    All $hitty cover skills DBs should maybe just trail receivers in coverage and then guess when the ball is coming and just run over the receiver plus throw their hands up in his face and hope they get away with it ?

  6. #166
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 8,298, Level: 61
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 152
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Overdrive5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    PullTogether73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,257
    Points
    8,298
    Level
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by OV Argo View Post
    PI rules/interpretations have been tinkered with over the years; the whole "uncatchable" thing I get for borderline interference calls - no way the receiver would have caught the ball. But still - IMO - interference is interference; if a DB tackles or trips a receiver while in his route, and before or during the QB throwing motion, I don't care if the ball lands 15 rows up in the stands, it was still PI - you should not be able to purposely hinder a receiver from his route (other than a "jam" in the first 5 yards - as the rule stands now), and especially with the ball in the air and the receiver trying to go for it - bumping into the receiver, running threw him, etc. And if the receiver stops in his route to adjust for the ball - the DB just gets to run threw him with no PI ? - er, no; look back for the ball and make a play on it yourself, and the DB can claim he has a right to the ball, and bumping into a stopped receiver should then be ok.

    All $hitty cover skills DBs should maybe just trail receivers in coverage and then guess when the ball is coming and just run over the receiver plus throw their hands up in his face and hope they get away with it ?
    I agree with the first part of your comments above (up to "etc.").
    I disagree with the latter part.

    A receiver knows the play, his route, and the timing of the throw.
    A DB does not.
    The receiver only has to watch for the ball.
    A DB has to react incredibly fast to any movement by the receiver to maintain coverage.
    Guessing when the ball is thrown and turning to find the ball when one doesn't know when it is arriving will likely result in losing the receiver.

    Plus, in the CFL the receiver gets to run to the line of scrimmage and meet the DB in full stride, running forward, while the DB waits for the receiver and has to run backward at first.
    Every advantage is with the receiver.

    Now, you want the DB to anticipate that the ball has been thrown, is about to arrive, has been under thrown, and then get out of the way of the receiver who suddenly stops and tries to run back over the DB?

    I don't see how this is fair - or possible.

  7. #167
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 22,752, Level: 93
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 598
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran10000 Experience Points
    1971GreyCup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,746
    Points
    22,752
    Level
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by AngeloV View Post
    I've always hated PI on a poorly underthrown ball. The fact of the matter is the contact is generated by the receiver when he stops.
    Today, PI is a definite factor in OC play calling. It must add +30% to the probability of success now.
    “it's not the strongest who survive nor the most intelligent but the ones most adaptable to change.’ Charles Darwin

  8. #168
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 10,369, Level: 67
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 81
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,472
    Points
    10,369
    Level
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by argolio View Post
    I'm at the point where I'd like to see penalty challenges eliminated. If the official makes a bad call, so be it. I'm used to that, and that bothers me less than a penalty being called or reversed on appeal, even if it helps my team.
    If they are going to have replay ... then ONLY on scoring plays and turnovers. Nothing else. This allows coaches to keep the challenge in case the refs say a score did not occur and coaches believe it did.

  9. #169
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 39,537, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 29.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdrive25000 Experience Points
    AngeloV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Thornhill
    Posts
    11,810
    Points
    39,537
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron View Post
    If they are going to have replay ... then ONLY on scoring plays and turnovers. Nothing else. This allows coaches to keep the challenge in case the refs say a score did not occur and coaches believe it did.
    Agreed, but I will add in or out of bounds to that. I've been saying this for a long time. Illegal contact challenges are the worst of the worst. If they limit it to those 3 categories, there is no need for challenges period, as the eye in the sky should be able to make quick calls on all of those.
    It's us vs the rest of the country

  10. #170
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 44,706, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Neely2005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    At the Tailgate
    Posts
    5,007
    Points
    44,706
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by argolio View Post
    I'm at the point where I'd like to see penalty challenges eliminated. If the official makes a bad call, so be it. I'm used to that, and that bothers me less than a penalty being called or reversed on appeal, even if it helps my team.

    I think the Masoli play is a result of the "egregious" standard they put in this year, which seems like a response to the NHL's standard for offside challenges where they called off goals even if a play was an inch offside. The Als got burned by that earlier this year when they caused a fumble right near the goal line but it wasn't reversed because in the league's opinion it wasn't egregious enough (an inch instead of a mile).
    Interestingly enough the NHL has changed their challenge system. Now if the coach challenges and loses not only do they lose their only timeout they also get a 2 minute penalty.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts