Yeah, you could tell based on how the Red Wings didn't celebrate after winning the shootout that they already knew about the result of the Capitals-Flyers game.

@@montrealsports29 yeah. I was furious. U don’t understand

@@RyanDallo I can understand, especially with the pulling of the goalie in a tie game.

@@montrealsports29 it’s so dumb. What are the chances the flyers can’t allow the caps to go to OT. So they have to pull

@@RyanDallo If I remember correctly, the Flyers had already been eliminated when they pulled their goalie but they didn't know that, so that made what happened in that game even worse for Red Wings fans.

According to Wikipedia, the song was solely written by Harold Faltermeyer. But Stevens is definitely a great guitarist!

@@montrealsports29 I read that he played guitar on the original version and that he helped Faltermeyer compose it. I could have sworn it was on Wikipedia but maybe it was somewhere else. Maybe I read it wrong too... When you think about it, the melody sounds a lot like his style.

@@magicmike7198 From Wikipedia: "In a 2022 interview with AXS TV, Stevens said Faltermeyer showed him a Betamax copy of the film's workprint and offered him to record the guitar section of the song." So, it sounds like the song had already been written before Stevens knew about it.

A lot of bands use backing tracks these days. It's a lot cheaper than hiring a keyboard player to go on tour. Modern English did the same thing: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gK54m8SXrd7GhH0.html

@@montrealsports29 Thanks,didnt know it was possible without drums in the backing track cause the timing of the band has to be perfect

@@justinjones9194 It does take away any possible spontaneity, but I guess that's just how things are done these days. For me, it's okay, as long as there's no lip synching!

The '80s had some great music!

Would you like to buy me a better camera?

Moi aussi. Quelle coincidence!

Try searching on ebay.

Still not for sale, sorry. Try searching on ebay for old jerseys.

It was 22,137. The place was pretty full, but it was the $5 kids tickets promotion again (and I think $2 hot dogs). It's funny you mention the rainstorm because it wasn't supposed to rain at all. If there's even a 30% chance of rain, I bring a poncho just in case. The forecast said 0%, so no poncho. Right before the game began, it started pouring. I at least had a jacket and a cap, but I got pretty wet. It only rained for about 5 minutes, so at least that was good.

I was quite surprised that he got such an early hook. What happened on the 1st possession wasn't his fault. I actually thought he got injured. But it's true that Mitchell is throwing a lot of interceptions lately. Powell is okay, but I don't think he's going to improve the team that much.

This was a nice return. Hopefully, there will be more!

Rambo has been a great addition (even if he's not related to Ken-Yon). I watched the Falcons' preseason game on NFL Network. They slightly edited the game, but I never heard Mack's name mentioned. I will gladly welcome Mack back to the Als. And the Falcons released Nathan Rourke after the game. He's running out of NFL options. It will be interesting to see what happens with him and Vernon if he goes back to BC.

@@montrealsports29 I have NFL Network but they didn't show Falcons game in my area (BC). I just read Mack got 7 snaps and only thrown to once but did not make the catch in preseason game. Oh well, he can earn $250K for many years in CFL so no shame in that.

@@enkadude NFL Network shows every NFL preseason game at some point during the week that they're played. They can't show them all live, of course, so they air them at various times during the week.

@@montrealsports29 Thanks for that tip. I’ve now PVR Falcons game and Titans game. I like to watch CFL players trying out in NFL.

@@enkadude You're welcome, but Mack has already been cut by the Falcons!

They signed him after Caleb Evans got hurt late in the previous game vs. Hamilton. He's out for the rest of the season.

I'm a fan of any QB who helps the Als win. It seems like Alexander will be a good choice to replace Cody, but no need to rush Cody out of town yet!

Thanks! And you are correct.

@@montrealsports29 You gotta upgrade my man lol. I watched like 15 videos you posted in a row though so keep hopefully you continue to upload during this upcoming season.

@@efaanshyper I actually have an old smartphone, but I find it very difficult to zoom in and out using the camera on it. Also, I'm pretty sure that the charge on the phone wouldn't last for an entire game. I know that the camera I'm using is pretty crappy, but it's easier to use and I have 7 rechargeable batteries for it, so I never have to worry about missing anything when I use it. Thanks for watching my videos and I will definitely continue uploading!

@@montrealsports29 makes alot of sense. Nice you can go to the games. I don’t live in Montreal sadly.

Sorry, but you're incorrect. A few years ago, they changed the rule. Even if there's an inadvertent whistle, if there's an immediate recovery of the fumble by the defense, you're allowed to challenge the play. However, in this case, for some inexplicable reason, the command centre determined that there was no immediate recovery on the play, which obviously wasn't the case.

@@montrealsports29 I think we are both wrong. I am going on 30 experience as a senior amateur football official where the situation is correct as I described it. However, I just went through the entire CFL rule book and the words “inadvertent whistle” do not exist. Therefore the default is as stated, the play was dead when the whistle blew, there was no recovery so there is no choice but to rule as Andre did. You can’t add to a play after the whistle no matter how obvious the subsequent recovery would have been. I agree that in this case there was clear evidence of how the play WOULD have ended but that’s not how the rules are written, or not written. I had a number of cases similar to this during my on-field career and you feel bad for the team you are about to screw over and worse for your crewmate who blew the whistle a bit early.

@@lancecampbell4323 I am 100% sure that I'm not wrong. That might be the way it's called in amateur football where there's no video review, but it's been different in the CFL ever since coaches have been able to challenge calls made on the field. I'm going to assume that you don't usually watch CFL games nowadays because if you did, you would be very aware of this rule change.

@@montrealsports29 Rule 10. Section 1. Article 4 (pg. 67). Clear recovery after a fumble is NOT reviewable. As with most of the rule book it’s pretty poorly worded but it’s there. I spent over 20 years on the CFL sideline crew and am very familiar with both rule books. No need to be rude.

@@lancecampbell4323 I wasn't being rude. But I also know that I'm right. The last 2 Argos-Stampeders games both had non-fumble calls overturned, one on a coach's challenge and one when the command centre stepped in on its own and changed the call (which I thought they could only do in the last 3 minutes of a game, but apparently they changed that now, too).

What does this have to do with Toronto?

@@montrealsports29TO the center of the universe, the call goes out and the refs follow orders.

It was not a good look for the league. And the command centre helped decide the outcome in Ottawa last night.

Did you see what the command centre did in the Saskatchewan-Ottawa game last night???

He also played for the Argos. And he also refused to let me interview him!

I have an autographed copy. Met Red at a conference years ago. The book is fantastic but some of his stories that he didn’t use are even crazier

As I said to someone else who was blaming Proulx, I think it was more official #42's fault for making the initial terrible call and then the command centre's fault for determining that there was no immediate recovery.

This was definitely not one of the CFL's finer moments!

This happened a year ago, so I don't remember. But it's cool that you were able to get his autograph!

@@montrealsports29 I will post it next week

I think it was more official #42's fault for making the initial terrible call and then the command centre's fault for determining that there was no immediate recovery.

WHy do you blame Proulx? He did not make the call.....he announced it

@@montrealsports29 The no immediate recovery call was made by number 42....once that call is made the command center cannot over rule it....

@@richardolender9271 How could #42 make the no immediate recovery call? He was the one who ruled that there was no fumble on the play, so he's not even paying attention to the recovery. It's up to the command centre when it's reviewing the play to determine if there was an immediate recovery.

I find it to be incompetent.

@@montrealsports29 you're right about that.

They weren't allowed to because they were told that there was no immediate recovery on the play, which obviously wasn't the case.

@@montrealsports29 Oh that is really bad!

@@MercerLawrenson Yes, it is!

The same play happened in the Toronto-Calgary game on Sunday when the Stampeders fumbled. Toronto challenged the play and won the challenge. I was thinking, "If they can get that call right, how the heck did they screw up the call in the Montreal game?" It's still baffling!

@@montrealsports29 perhaps news of the backlash made its way to their ears and didn’t want a repeat.

Not like the video was close…it was so obviously a fumble!

@@ferociousfil5747 It was a ridiculous decision by the command centre!

I think the officiating is about the same as it's been the last few years, with plenty of bad calls mixed in with the correct calls. But it's not an easy job!

And amateur command centre, too.

Or Confusing Fumble Laws.

At least this call didn't cost the Als the game!

It's the first time I've ever seen a ball carrier ruled down by contact when he fumbled the ball while he was still standing upright!

Because the people who reviewed it are incompetent.

Because it is rigged af

@@QcDream1 lololololol yeah ok sherlock

it was not reviewed..once ref number 42 said no immediate contact....play is over

I think what happened is the player was incorrectly blown dead prior to the recovery. So the ball goes back the the team that last possessed it, Hamilton. It was whistle that was the bad call. But once the whistle happened, the play was dead regardless of what happened afterwards. The command centres hands were tied.

It was baffling!

The command centre employees don't deserve to earn much money.

I always thought that was a weird thing to do because so many rules are different between the 2 leagues. NFL officials make their share of bad calls, too. But it's not an easy job.

Because there was an inadvertent whistle, the ball needs to be immediately recovered by the other team in order to be able to challenge the play. But the CFL must have a very strange definition of the term "immediate recovery" because, as you said, it took only 2 seconds for the Alouettes to recover the ball.

@@montrealsports29 Ah, I didn't watch the replay with sound enough I guess. If a whistle had blown then that does indeed change things. Thanks for the heads up!

NO there is such a rule....but it does not apply here

It was hard to miss, but everyone involved somehow managed to miss it! Do you usually watch CFL games?

Just the fact that you know this makes you cool in my book. Cheers!

@@AvroBellow What are you referring to?

It seems like nowadays, the officials are waiting for the command centre to step in to make the call. Problem is, a lot of times, they make the wrong call! This ruling was baffling!

@@montrealsports29 in general this season as been horrible in calls made by the refs, CC and spotters. Blatantly obvious penalties not being reversed/overruled.

The consequence is that the CFL looks incompetent, both on and off the field.

What rule did he invent....and the ref who announced he call....did not make the call

I couldn't believe what I was watching! It made no sense!

​@@montrealsports29made no sense glad they win can you imagine if the Als would have lost ?

@@simonson7653 I said to myself, "If this ends up costing them the game..." but at least I never had to finish that thought. I also said, "I have to make a video of this because it's so unbelievably bad!"

So many scoring chances are the result of bad turnovers.