
Originally Posted by
Nanookster
Last season when Reilly was driven to the ground and no call was made in the game or replay I sent a registered letter to the Commish asking why there was no call on the play and why the command centre got it wrong.
This is the text from the email I sent:
[October 8, 2018
CFL Commissioner Randy Ambrosie
THE CANADIAN FOOTBALL LEAGUE
50 Wellington Street East - 3rd Floor
Toronto, ON M5E 1C8, CANADA
Commissioner Randy Ambrosie,
As a 27 year season ticket holder of the Edmonton Eskimos I would like an explanation on the Command Centres ruling on the hit on Mike Reilly in the Edmonton/Saskatchewan game on October 8, 2018.
In regards to Play #135, the CFL Command Centre ruled there was no clear obvious roughing the passer on the play and ruled a Saskatchewan touchdown.
Mike Reilly appeared to be hit above the shoulder, he was definitely driven to the ground, and the Rider defender definitely landed on the Eskimo QB with his full weight. There is absolutely no debating he landed on Reilly with his full weight. Not a single portion of the Rider defender’s body touched the ground. This was very clearly roughing the passer by the CFL’s own rulebook definition. From Rule 7:
Article 4 — Roughing The Passer
Because the act of passing puts the passer in a particularly vulnerable position to injury, special rules against roughing the passer apply. Once the ball is released, defensive players must avoid all unnecessary contact with the passer. A player shall be penalized for any act of Unnecessary Roughness to the passer, including but not limited to:
A) Contacting the passer in an unnecessary manner, including stuffing him to the ground, violently throwing him to the ground, and landing on him with most of the defender's weight
B) Any blow above the passer's shoulder,
C) All rushing defenders must attempt to avoid forcibly hitting a passer in the pocket, at or below the knees, either if their path to the passer was unrestricted, or if they are coming off a blocker,
D) Attacking the passer who, after releasing the ball, is either standing still or fading backwards and is obviously out of the play and remains out of the play,
E) When the quarterback slides feet first, all unnecessary contact must be avoided. The slide must be done in a timely manner to allow the defence to avoid such contact.
F) Contacting the passer if either the initial source of contact, or primary source of contact, is the defender's helmet.
I can appreciate it wasn’t certain it was helmet-on-helmet (F). Although it is certain (A) occurred, Really was driven into the ground, the Rider defender landed on Reilly with his full weight. The blow was above his shoulder
(B).
I am seriously considering discontinuing my season seats. I have attended Eskimo and CFL games far longer than those 27 years. I can live with teams not always being a contender. I am tired of the officiating that doesn’t have any accountability or corrective actions. I can even live with the call on the field. Although when the Command Centre has the benefit of the replay, they should get the call correct.
The CFL Command Centre doesn’t get calls correct. And it is often enough that this is noticed in virtually every game in the CFL.
I’d appreciate a reply explaining what, if any, penalty or remedial training is going to occur for those in the command centre in regards to this particular play.
As well, I am hopeful you will reply explaining why I should continue to watch this poorly officiated product on the field?
Sincerely yours,
Signed Nanooster's real name
His explanation on the call was it was a tough one. That the defenders facemark contacted Reilly's helmet first and the defenders facemaks isn't considered part of the helmet. He doesn't address that the first contact was on Reilly's head (regardless what hit him) and he doesn't address Reilly being driven into the ground.
It looks like my letter was passed around the office as they were not sure how to answer it, likely because they couldn't debate my factual questions.
The reply does show we have a commish that cares, he may not have given me the answer I wanted or expected, he did issue an apology and recognized it was a tough call. I still to this day do not believe they made the right call, the entire purpose of that rule is to protect our QBs.
Hopefully the CFL did learn from that mistake, even if they did not want to admit to it.
- - - Updated - - -
If anyone wants to see the letter and football I will post an image of it. I don't have a paid photo bucket account so it puts those stupid watermarks across images now.