2006 CFL Semi-Finals Review

Sunday the CFL delivered exciting East and West Semi-Finals that reminded those who watched the games how exciting the game can be. Overtime Central provides our notes and comments on the games and broadcast.

2006 CFL East Semi-Final – Montreal at Toronto

  • “Pinball” Clemons catching the punt on the sidelines and taking off with it shows the kind of unpretentious atmosphere the CFL provides.
  • The crowd looked like at least 30,000 to me, but apparently, the Argos could only muster 26,214 with only a week to sell tickets.
  • The Semi-Final stadium signage sure helps dress up the stadium to give it a better feel.
  • Steve Armitage is calling the game. The CBC cannot be serious about the CFL when Armitage and Mark Lee are your only play-by-play guys. They do not exactly have the legacy of Don Whitman, but for reporters to be calling for Whitman’s return is ridiculous. Whitman is past his prime and that is why he lost his job to Chris Cuthbert years ago. What would he be like now years later?
  • Is it me or does the CBC like to show two plays, go to commercial, show two plays and cut to commercial?
  • It is too bad Ricky Williams big catch and run was called back on a holding call. Best play for Ricky all season.
  • Winnipeg took a procedure call at Toronto’s 5-yard line on 3rd and 1, trying to draw Toronto offside. Showing no confidence in their offence just getting the first down, they cost themselves 4 points, the margin of victory.
  • The first half was a little slow, but overall the game was outstanding with great plays (Armstrong’s catch, Bruce’s run), lead changes, storylines (Roberts, Stegall, Bishop) and a down to the wire finish.

2006 CFL West Semi-Final – Saskatchewan at Calgary

  • Bad transition to the next game. “Can I get some water, please?” Friedman is overheard saying after congratulating the panel on a good job.
  • Mark Lee – awful. Chris Walby – incomprehensible. You cannot tell me these are the best guys available.
  • A punt return touchdown. The return game may play a part in the playoffs after taking the season off.
  • Just before the half, with the ‘Riders driving, the debate starts about if the ‘Riders will go to the end zone before kicking a field goal. Did they think that they would really set the ball position for a field goal? Not much to take credit for afterwards. In fact minus points for suggesting that positioning the ball to the middle of the field for the field goal try was an option.
  • The crowd is supposed to be loud. I cannot hear it. Turn up the crowd noise CBC. It sounds like the crowd noise is coming from a bar in Saskatchewan.
  • Calgary was the only team to use the instant replay in both games. They won their first in what becomes a judgement call as to whether there is evidence that Thurman’s knee was down. Calgary lost the second challenge and their timeout on Burris’ fumble where video could not show anything in the pile.
  • Nice finish for ‘Rider fans, watching time tick away on Calgary. However, a late touchdown by Calgary could have kept the score closer and interest in the game. Still, a great game that came down to the last minute.

Overall Review

Two high scoring games start the 2006 CFL playoffs. When real meaningful games are on the line you know the game is never over. Coaches and players will turn bad starts or momentum swings around when you are playing for advancement to the next round. We expect much more excitement the rest of the way.

4 Responses to “2006 CFL Semi-Finals Review”

  1. Bill Says:

    Pinball doing that return was great! Luckily it wasn’t later in the game or some from winnipeg might have decked him :)

    There did seem to be a lot of people there. They even had the 3rd deck open with people in it. Surprised it was really only 26 thou. Looked like more. And it sure seemed to be loud. Good for toronto!

    Armitage has to be one of the worst culprits – try and count how many times he says “wide open” when a ball is thrown to a receiver. Matt Dominguez was wide open on the touchdown. Having like 2-3 guys there when the ball arrives is already wide open. Maybe “open” if he has a step or something but definitely not “wide open”. That’s got to be one of big my pet peeves.

    Another one is how Darren Flutie and Khari Jones say “offsides” when there’s an offside penalty. There’s no “s”! That really bugs me too!

    And thirdly is when their voice gets really high or excited when there’s nothing really happening. LIke a long bomb but then no receiver for miles and miles. Makes you look at the TV and it turns out to be nothing. WHY AM I TALKING IN THIS LOUD AND EXCITING VOICE! Annoying, eh? :)

    I do have to admit that I found Mark Lee less annoying this season than other ones.

    The one Chris Walby thing I remember from this game is on the Rider drive at the end of the half. He talks about not living off the short, sideline passes and that you have to go downfield to Armstead and Dominguez. Then he says we’re doing good going out of bounds to stop the clock. Argh! And we do end up going to Dominguez for the touchdown so that’s kind of funny :)

    And I’m glad we won and Keith did great. That way nobody will remember the dropped touchdown pass or the dropped 3rd down pass (not all keith’s fault either).

  2. Bill Says:

    and yeah, the Friedman water slave thing was funny :)

    Anyone catch the signoff? Friedman said something like “Khari 0-and-2 Jones”.
    I guess something to do with Khari picking winnipeg and calgary.

  3. Jon Says:

    Good observations Bill. Hard to remember some of these things to write up. That “offsides” thing makes them sound like they are seven years old.

    That wide open thing gets me too. Basically Canadian football broadcasters have a repertoire of a few sayings they repeat and repeat. Then you get into their basic understanding of the game, like mixing up post and corner routes, or outs and curls and calling formations the wrong thing. They all need to go to school. And Walby played the game but he still said multiple times this year, including last week, that “if that pass was behind the line of scrimmage it would be a lateral.” Either he does not understand or he is having a hard time explaining it. Either way, that is bad position for a colour commentator.

    For the record, a forward thrown ball is a forward pass and not recoverable if incomplete. Anything that is parallel or behind the QB (line of scrimmage is irrelevant) is not forward and therefore a live ball. Underhand or overhand has nothing to do with it as well.

  4. Bill Says:

    yeah! i forgot about that behind the line of scrimmage thing. That had me scratching my head as to what the heck he was talking about. And I know what it’s supposed to be. But if walby said it, then it must be true :)

OC Jottings

No jottings in the last 7 days. Here is a random jotting.