That is a weird rule. I thought that the ball must have rolled out of bounds, but not shown on TV, and then rolled back inbounds and then Williams deliberately stepped out of bounds and then picked up the ball. Weird but well coached.
Lions vs. Bombers Oct. 15, 2022
Moderator: Team Captains
-
DanoT
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 4445
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
- Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter
-
Toppy Vann
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 10104
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm
I think I had a good line on that kick and am certain only his foot was out. Now that's it mentioned it was deliberate what happened made sense as it was confusing. I forgot to PVR this but I thought his foot was out, then he gets ball in his hands and then the whistle. I'd have thought the rule that you can't go deliberately go out of bounds and then come into a play would have prevailed there but it didn't.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
Trying to figure this out...
The last Bomber kickoff is not shown on the game recap on cfl.ca or on TSN highlights. The play is summarized on cfl.ca as follows:
(01:06) M. LIEGGHIO Kickoff (69 yds), Ball Out of Bounds, Penalty: Illegal Kickoff called on Winnipeg (M. LIEGGHIO) (10 yds.) - Enforced From B40
Section 2, Article 2(b) of the rule book (which governs kickoffs) says:
The ball, unless touched, shall not go Out of Bounds in the Field of Play.
PENALTY: Team B will take possession either 30 yards in advance of where the ball was kicked or at the point where the ball went out of bounds.
Section 9, article 8, which governs players who are out of bounds, says:
It is illegal for a player of either team to go out of bounds, without contact with an opponent, and to reach back into or re-enter the field of play to touch or recover a loose ball.
Note: When the ball hits a player who is out of bounds and not attempting to touch or recover it, the ball is considered out of bounds at that point regardless of how the player got out of bounds.
Are these the rules at play or am I missing something?
If these are the rules at play, did Williams go out of bounds, and then wait for the ball to hit him? Or did he reach down and pick it up?
If the former, then the ball would be out of bounds and Winnipeg would get a penalty: Lions would get the ball 30 yards in advance of where it was kicked, i.e. their own 50. The summary on cfl.ca says it was a 10 yard penalty assessed from the Bomber 40 and BC got it on the Bomber 50. I don't see how that summary matches up with the rule book. IN any case, generally, this seems to be a terrible strategy because if the ball doesn't hit him, a Bomber player could pick up the ball near the Lions' goal line.
If Williams did deliberately touch the ball, then Williams should have gotten a penalty for illegal participation.
The last Bomber kickoff is not shown on the game recap on cfl.ca or on TSN highlights. The play is summarized on cfl.ca as follows:
(01:06) M. LIEGGHIO Kickoff (69 yds), Ball Out of Bounds, Penalty: Illegal Kickoff called on Winnipeg (M. LIEGGHIO) (10 yds.) - Enforced From B40
Section 2, Article 2(b) of the rule book (which governs kickoffs) says:
The ball, unless touched, shall not go Out of Bounds in the Field of Play.
PENALTY: Team B will take possession either 30 yards in advance of where the ball was kicked or at the point where the ball went out of bounds.
Section 9, article 8, which governs players who are out of bounds, says:
It is illegal for a player of either team to go out of bounds, without contact with an opponent, and to reach back into or re-enter the field of play to touch or recover a loose ball.
Note: When the ball hits a player who is out of bounds and not attempting to touch or recover it, the ball is considered out of bounds at that point regardless of how the player got out of bounds.
Are these the rules at play or am I missing something?
If these are the rules at play, did Williams go out of bounds, and then wait for the ball to hit him? Or did he reach down and pick it up?
If the former, then the ball would be out of bounds and Winnipeg would get a penalty: Lions would get the ball 30 yards in advance of where it was kicked, i.e. their own 50. The summary on cfl.ca says it was a 10 yard penalty assessed from the Bomber 40 and BC got it on the Bomber 50. I don't see how that summary matches up with the rule book. IN any case, generally, this seems to be a terrible strategy because if the ball doesn't hit him, a Bomber player could pick up the ball near the Lions' goal line.
If Williams did deliberately touch the ball, then Williams should have gotten a penalty for illegal participation.
Apparently the NFL has the same rule. Lucky Whitehead is credited with reminding Williams of the rule after Janarion Grant missed an opportunity to do the same thing earlier in the game on a kickoff in front of the B.C. bench.
The NFL has the following rule:
ARTICLE 3. BALL OUT OF BOUNDS.
Item 1. Ball in Player Possession. A ball that is in player possession is out of bounds when the runner is out of bounds, or when the ball touches a boundary line or anything that is on or outside such line, except another player or an official.
Item 2. Loose Ball. A loose ball that is not in player control is out of bounds when it touches a boundary line or anything that is on or outside such line, including a player, an official, or a pylon.
The equivalent CFL rule is:
Article 1 – Definitions
The ball is Out of Bounds when it touches a Sideline, Sideline in Goal, Dead Line or the ground or any other object on or beyond these lines. The ball is Out of Bounds when a player in possession of the ball touches a Sideline, Sideline in Goal, Dead Line or the ground or any other object on or beyond these lines.
The rules differ in that the CFL rules specify that the ball is out when it touches a sideline... or any other object, while the NFL rules state that a ball is out of bounds when it touches a boundary line or anything... including a player.
In any case, there is an apparent conflict between the ball out of bounds rule and the illegal participation rule. Was the ball out of bounds because it touched a player who was out of bounds, or did Williams illegally participate in the play after going out of bounds?
It seems to me that player deliberately went out of bounds and then picked up the ball while it was still in bounds. The kick itself did not go out of bounds.
The referee's interpretation of this rule is, in my view, absurd. It should have been illegal participation.
ARTICLE 3. BALL OUT OF BOUNDS.
Item 1. Ball in Player Possession. A ball that is in player possession is out of bounds when the runner is out of bounds, or when the ball touches a boundary line or anything that is on or outside such line, except another player or an official.
Item 2. Loose Ball. A loose ball that is not in player control is out of bounds when it touches a boundary line or anything that is on or outside such line, including a player, an official, or a pylon.
The equivalent CFL rule is:
Article 1 – Definitions
The ball is Out of Bounds when it touches a Sideline, Sideline in Goal, Dead Line or the ground or any other object on or beyond these lines. The ball is Out of Bounds when a player in possession of the ball touches a Sideline, Sideline in Goal, Dead Line or the ground or any other object on or beyond these lines.
The rules differ in that the CFL rules specify that the ball is out when it touches a sideline... or any other object, while the NFL rules state that a ball is out of bounds when it touches a boundary line or anything... including a player.
In any case, there is an apparent conflict between the ball out of bounds rule and the illegal participation rule. Was the ball out of bounds because it touched a player who was out of bounds, or did Williams illegally participate in the play after going out of bounds?
It seems to me that player deliberately went out of bounds and then picked up the ball while it was still in bounds. The kick itself did not go out of bounds.
The referee's interpretation of this rule is, in my view, absurd. It should have been illegal participation.
My final comment on this:
The note under the illegal participation rule seems determinative to me.
It is illegal for a player of either team to go out of bounds, without contact with an opponent, and to reach back into or re-enter the field of play to touch or recover a loose ball.
Note: When the ball hits a player who is out of bounds and not attempting to touch or recover it, the ball is considered out of bounds at that point regardless of how the player got out of bounds.
It specifically contemplates this very situation and clarifies that the ball is only out of bounds when it hits a player who is not attempting to touch or recover it. Otherwise, it is illegal participation for a player to reach back into the field of play to recover a loose ball as Williams did.
This may be different from the NFL rule.
The note under the illegal participation rule seems determinative to me.
It is illegal for a player of either team to go out of bounds, without contact with an opponent, and to reach back into or re-enter the field of play to touch or recover a loose ball.
Note: When the ball hits a player who is out of bounds and not attempting to touch or recover it, the ball is considered out of bounds at that point regardless of how the player got out of bounds.
It specifically contemplates this very situation and clarifies that the ball is only out of bounds when it hits a player who is not attempting to touch or recover it. Otherwise, it is illegal participation for a player to reach back into the field of play to recover a loose ball as Williams did.
This may be different from the NFL rule.
-
TheLionKing
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 25472
- Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Vancouver
Being the last home Lion game in the regular season, why didn't they announce the Outstanding, Top Lineman, Most Popular players ?
I wondered about that too but perhaps it’s because there are two weeks left in the regular season. The Lions are accustomed to finishing the season at home. I don’t think fans have been asked to vote for their favourite players. Perhaps we’ll get a chance to honour the outstanding players at a home playoff game.TheLionKing wrote: ↑Sun Oct 16, 2022 2:43 pmBeing the last home Lion game in the regular season, why didn't they announce the Outstanding, Top Lineman, Most Popular players ?
-
Hambone
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8632
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
- Location: Living in PG when not at BC Place, Grey Cup or Mazatlan.
A couple of observations:
On Grant's punt return TD Flintoft may have outkicked coverage. It was a 62 yard boot. When Grant caught the ball Lion gunners (3 of them) were still 10+ yards away giving Grant plenty of time and space to read his blocker and find a lane. Last year I felt at times Flintofts's deeper kicks were more driving than hanging as I'd been accustomed to seeing out of Long and Leone. Having said that he has been effective this year with some lower screamers that cause the returner to field them off the skip or sometimes two skips.
On Adams he seems to throw balls on those less than 10 yard routes with a very low flat trajectory making them easy to be tipped or batted down if he doesn't find a good passing lane. Also he's not very accurate with those throws. They are usually low or "away" but thankfully rarely sailing high. The low ones have the receiver having to drop to their knees to make the catch. The "away" ones make the receiver look like a baseball catcher calling for the ball on the inside corner then has to dive the other way for the ball thrown 3' outside. In both cases the receiver is left having to work hard to make the catch and if he does haul it in has zero chance of getting an YAC.
On Grant's punt return TD Flintoft may have outkicked coverage. It was a 62 yard boot. When Grant caught the ball Lion gunners (3 of them) were still 10+ yards away giving Grant plenty of time and space to read his blocker and find a lane. Last year I felt at times Flintofts's deeper kicks were more driving than hanging as I'd been accustomed to seeing out of Long and Leone. Having said that he has been effective this year with some lower screamers that cause the returner to field them off the skip or sometimes two skips.
On Adams he seems to throw balls on those less than 10 yard routes with a very low flat trajectory making them easy to be tipped or batted down if he doesn't find a good passing lane. Also he's not very accurate with those throws. They are usually low or "away" but thankfully rarely sailing high. The low ones have the receiver having to drop to their knees to make the catch. The "away" ones make the receiver look like a baseball catcher calling for the ball on the inside corner then has to dive the other way for the ball thrown 3' outside. In both cases the receiver is left having to work hard to make the catch and if he does haul it in has zero chance of getting an YAC.
You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
-
Sir Purrcival
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 4716
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Comox Valley
I tend to agree with your interpretation. A player putting himself out of bounds deliberately and then touching the ball is a very different scenario than a player who may have touched or be on the out of bounds line but hasn't further had chance to absent himself from the play. I suppose trying to determine intent might present a challenge. Saw this play in the NFL a few years ago in a highlight package and it was exactly the same scenario. In that case, the kick returner had to lay down with his feet on the sideline in order to reach the ball to then make it an illegal kickoff. There was no doubting what the intent was there as much the way it seemed in this case. I guess you could swing the other way on this and make it just a straight illegal participation penalty regardless. Part of me suspects however that the league might want to try and discourage no matter how subtly the kick to the sidelines play. If it starts burning the kicking team, the tendency will be to kick it closer to the centre to minimize the risk of opposing teams taking advantage of this rule. Kicking teams don't like this because it provides better opportunities for big run backs. In the League's relentless quest to provide a more exciting game, I could see the reasoning going forward not to do anything about the status quo.maxlion wrote: ↑Sun Oct 16, 2022 1:44 pmMy final comment on this:
The note under the illegal participation rule seems determinative to me.
It is illegal for a player of either team to go out of bounds, without contact with an opponent, and to reach back into or re-enter the field of play to touch or recover a loose ball.
Note: When the ball hits a player who is out of bounds and not attempting to touch or recover it, the ball is considered out of bounds at that point regardless of how the player got out of bounds.
It specifically contemplates this very situation and clarifies that the ball is only out of bounds when it hits a player who is not attempting to touch or recover it. Otherwise, it is illegal participation for a player to reach back into the field of play to recover a loose ball as Williams did.
This may be different from the NFL rule.
Nevertheless, a very heads up play at a crucial point in the game.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
-
Sir Purrcival
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 4716
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Comox Valley
Well just to put some context on it. The Lion's had this game in hand at a couple points and bad play and penalties let Wpg keep hanging around. If it was a full WPG squad of starters, the Lion's would have paid big time for their lack lustre ability to control to the end of the game. The fact that they were facing a bunch of 2nd stringers and still struggled to put the game away made if feel that really it was a loss. Had they been facing a competent, fully rostered Blue Bombers, this game wouldn't have been a W. A good team with a lot of the line should have been able to manage a stout defense and a lot more ball control. In fact, they looked almost as inept if not more so than a Wpg team with a bunch of replacement players who had nothing on the line to play for except field time.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
Fair enough, but for full context the Lions were without Rourke, Burnham, Whitehead, Norman, Mackie, Breaux, Banks, Gwacham and Greene, most or all of whom should be back for the playoffs, if not sooner.Sir Purrcival wrote: ↑Mon Oct 17, 2022 11:02 amWell just to put some context on it. The Lion's had this game in hand at a couple points and bad play and penalties let Wpg keep hanging around. If it was a full WPG squad of starters, the Lion's would have paid big time for their lack lustre ability to control to the end of the game. The fact that they were facing a bunch of 2nd stringers and still struggled to put the game away made if feel that really it was a loss. Had they been facing a competent, fully rostered Blue Bombers, this game wouldn't have been a W. A good team with a lot of the line should have been able to manage a stout defense and a lot more ball control. In fact, they looked almost as inept if not more so than a Wpg team with a bunch of replacement players who had nothing on the line to play for except field time.
What seems to be lost in this 'Winnipeg played lots of back-ups' (eleven, I believe) narrative is that we played with a lot of 2nd stringers too due to injury.Sir Purrcival wrote: ↑Mon Oct 17, 2022 11:02 amThe fact that they were facing a bunch of 2nd stringers and still struggled to put the game away made if feel that really it was a loss. Had they been facing a competent, fully rostered Blue Bombers, this game wouldn't have been a W.
Rourke
Whitehead
Burnham
Gwacham
Mackie
Norman
Banks
Breaux/Edwards-Cooper
DH
Roar, You Lions, Roar
-
Toppy Vann
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 10104
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm
It's surprising that the Lions D up to this Bombers game haven't been looking to make big takeaway plays like early on when Rourke was still playing:
I thought Brandon Alexander's take down of Dominique Rhymes warranted unnec. roughness.
But I also have to agree with JC Abbott that Rhymes' action post-game if true was wrong. Not sure how the HC hasn't made it abundantly clear that no one on his team is going to pull any move like this:
https://3downnation.com/2022/10/16/lion ... e-bombers/
"For weeks, the story of the B.C. Lions’ defence has been their failure to get the momentum-changing turnovers for which they were so well known in the early going. That changed in a big way when halfback Marcus Sayles broke on an out route after Dru Brown muffed a snap in the first quarter, racing 45 yards to the endzone for a pick-six."
I thought Brandon Alexander's take down of Dominique Rhymes warranted unnec. roughness.
But I also have to agree with JC Abbott that Rhymes' action post-game if true was wrong. Not sure how the HC hasn't made it abundantly clear that no one on his team is going to pull any move like this:
"Alexander is the type of defender who routinely plays on the edge and sometimes crosses the line, which I believe was the case here. Unfortunately, the press box conversation after the game was that Rhymes felt well enough to cross the hallway to the Bombers’ locker room and attempt a confrontation with the safety — the second time the Lions have been accused of that type of behaviour this year.
I have made my thoughts on that issue abundantly clear and will not change them. Post-game altercations of any kind are embarrassing at an organizational level and hopefully the Lions crack down hard in this instance, unlike last time."
https://3downnation.com/2022/10/16/lion ... e-bombers/
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy