Let's get this straight: If a Canadian Football League team decides to file a protest with the league office, it costs $5,000. But if the protest is disclaimed by the commissioner, the team does not get a refund.

That's according to the CFL bylaws, which may be in need of some modernization to take into account justification of intent, not the end result of the investigation.

The Montreal Alouettes have filed an official protest with the CFL and forked over five grand claiming they were robbed of a touchdown by a play that was blown dead after the score, not before or just after the snap, in what became a 19-12 loss to the B.C. Lions last Friday.

The CFL is claiming that notwithstanding a mistake was made by the game supervisor and video replay official in thinking the time remaining in the game had been 1:05 instead of one minute, the on-field officials did, in fact, blow the play dead well before the touchdown had been scored.

If this happened in a game, a team could challenge an official's call by throwing a flag onto the field and have the video replay official review it. In this case, it is the video replay official who is under review, or at least an error he made in tandem with the game supervisor that contributed to this schmozzle.

If this were a flagrant and abusive waste of time by the Alouettes, that would be one thing. But they honestly believe a mistake has cost them at the very least six points and the potential to tie the game and they want the matter reviewed.

It says here that for purposes of integrity, the league should forget about the $5,000 rule.

"For a protest to be upheld, there must be evidence a game official intentionally misinterpreted or misapplied a playing rule," CFL chief operating officer Michael Copeland said in a prepared statement.

Say what you will about CFL officials, but it would be inconceivable and incomprehensible to think they would intentionally misinterpret or misapply a rule. That's tantamount to deliberately affecting the outcome of a game. And that's a far bigger issue.

In 2004, the Calgary Stampeders filed a protest over an onside kick on the last play of a game against B.C. that was a game-winning touchdown called back because the officials flagged for no yards. While it turned out the officials erred, it did not result in the changing of the score, which Calgary lost 19-17.

But for the purpose of filing a protest, it cost them $5,000 -- and the protest was disallowed. Talk about a double whammy.

Football broadcaster Matt Dunigan, who was the coach of the Stampeders in that game in 2004, knew all too well what Montreal coach Marc Trestman had to have been feeling on the controversial call that negated his team's touchdown.

"It's a gut-wrenching feeling, weak in the knees, want to puke type of thing," Dunigan told sportsnet.ca. "It was tough. You hate to see it happen."

The commissioner can rule in various ways on a protest: disclaim the protest or allow the protest and award the game to either of the clubs or order the game to be replayed in whole or in part or recommend that disciplinary action be taken by the Board of Governors.

Will the video replay official and the game supervisor have to pay a fine for their collective gaffe in this controversy or will they be quietly censured? It has already been acknowledged they goofed. But that was before this took on a life of its own with the Als' protest.

To think something radical would arise from this mess, such as replaying the final minute of the game, would be a monumental move. But to be fair, it would require going back to B.C. to finish out the game. While the two teams play this Sunday in Montreal, the Als have a distinct advantage playing at home. The two teams do not play one another again this year in B.C., so going back to B.C. Place and opening it up for a minute left in regulation time and likely overtime is not going to happen.

This could turn out to be one of the most profound decisions that Mark Cohon, now in his third year as CFL commissioner, will have to make. But the wording of the constitution allows him to lean on the wording of the law to keep the game as it was, albeit acknowledging a mistake was made and the CFL will do its best to make sure it is not repeated. To rule otherwise and allow the final minute to be replayed would be precedent-setting, incredible actually, an Only In The CFL moment, to be sure.