Let's see that again

JIM BENDER -- Sun Media

, Last Updated: 10:53 AM ET

It is a rather moot point now and it has been overshadowed by all the kerfuffle in Bomberville the past few days.

But some believe that B.C. defensive back Korey Banks was guilty of pass interference when he pushed Winnipeg receiver Arjei Franklin to the ground in the end zone in the fourth quarter of last week's loss to the Lions.

Others believe Franklin took a dive due to an innocent bump from the B.C. defender.

There was no flag on the play and the Bombers are still awaiting official word from CFL HQ on whether pass interference should have been called.

We're not ones to blame the result of a game on an iffy call or even an iffy non-call. But to us it was at least illegal contact (10-yard penalty).

If pass interference had been called, the Bombers would've had the ball at the B.C. one-yard line trailing 24-18. A touchdown would've given Winnipeg a one-point lead.

If Banks had been flagged for illegal contact, it would've been a 10-yard penalty and the Bombers could have at least scored a field goal to pull within 24-21 with about five minutes left.

The way the deflated Bomber defence folded in the late going, Winnipeg would likely have lost anyhow.But the point is such critical plays should be reviewable.

Right now, no penalties or non-calls are reviewable, likely because that's the way the NFL does it. But such plays can affect outcomes of games.

More importantly, they can have a correlating effect at the gate. Think more people would come to tomorrow's match against Calgary if the Bombers were 1-3 rather than 0-4?

Frankly, I don't give a damn whether the official made the right call. But if the CFL is going to employ instant replay, they should review all plays that can turn a game around, even if it does question an official's judgment. Heck, what review doesn't?

"I could use one (challenge) in that situation and they could see that maybe it was a penalty for us and we get the ball at the one," Bomber head coach Doug Berry said. "Conversely, if (pass interference) had been called and the opponent wanted to challenge, they could find p.i. was not involved ...

"Are you ever going to change the call on something that is obvious and flagrant? Maybe."

Funny thing is, CFL director of officiating Tom Higgins was still waiting for the game film yesterday to review the play.

Why wait a week, then tell the official he was right or wrong? That may help Higgins evaluate the officiating crew but it won't help teams at the gate in a gate-driven league. And all the cameras are already in place to review such instances right there and then.

"I never thought that instant replay should have been put in in the first place because I thought it would slow the game down considerably," said Higgins, a former CFL head coach. "But I've since changed my mind. I like where we're at.

"I don't want to add anything to it. Officials don't determine the outcomes of games, players do. Or key plays do."

There's the rub. That Banks pick was a key play.

"If the flag had been made in our favour, who knows what would would have happened?" Berry mused. "Maybe we're both 1-3 right now."

Making such plays reviewable would also reduce all that unintelligible screaming at the refs and prevent players from blaming outcomes of games on the officials rather than themselves.

Instant reply was introduced to get things right. That should include all things.

But the CFL will never do it. It just makes too much sense.


Photos