Reviewing Scoring Plays Among Suggested Rule Changes

While they still need approval, three new rules should be in place for the start of the 2012 season; two regarding helmets coming off during play and one in which all scoring plays will be reviewed.

If you watched games last season, especially in the first half of the year, you saw helmets pop off at an alarming rate. It seemed that not a quarter would go by without a helmet flying off. The league has decided that enough is enough and have put forth two rules that will hopefully curb lost helmets. The play will now be whistled dead should the ball carrier lose his helmet. In addition to that, any non-ball carrier that loses their lid will be ineligible for the remainder of that play. Should they continue to play, their team will be penalized 10 yards for illegal participation. If they are hit by an opposing player after losing their helmet, the opposing team will be penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness.

It is a good rule, and one that I hope will help eliminate helmets flying off. The only issue is that there is some leeway – meaning judgment – on helmets that pop off while players are blocking or being blocked. I don't like when rules can be interpreted differently by different referee crews; from one game to the next the calls could vary drastically. Rules need to be pretty straightforward with little room for interpretation so that the chance of a blown call is kept to a minimum.

The other change is one that I have been calling for since mid-October, so to say I am happy to hear that the league will be adopting the NFL-style automatic reviews on all scoring plays is an understatement. Scoring plays decide games, and getting those right is the most important thing the league can do. I do hope that the league will expand the rule to include all plays in the end zone, but if they do not, that is not a big deal. I noticed that NFL referees were much more inclined to rule a play a touchdown and let replay handle it than they were to call it otherwise which would not allow for a replay. I would expect the same to happen in the CFL.

You have to hand it to the CFL, they are not afraid to alter or change the rules of the game to ensure a better product. These potential changes are all a step in the right direction.

Calling For Change

With just under six minutes left to play in the fourth quarter of Sunday's game between the Hamilton Tiger-Cats and Montreal Alouettes, the Ti-Cats were scrimmaging first and 10 from the Als' 29-yard line. Kevin Glenn threw a pass to the end zone towards Chris Williams. The catch was made simultaneously by Williams and Montreal Defensive Back Seth Williams. When both players came down to the ground, the ball was knocked loose and the ruling on the field was incomplete.

The ruling on the field was wrong.

In watching a replay of the play (the play itself starts at 16:08, and replays are shown at 16:32, 16:45 and 17:32), it is clear to see that Chris Williams catches the pass, takes four steps, falls to the ground out of bounds before Seth Williams knocks the ball out of the hands of Chris Williams.

When TSN showed a replay of questionable play, both Gord Miller and Matt Dunigan said that the call on the field should have been a touchdown.

Under normal circumstances, Hamilton would have challenged the call and had it reversed; however, Hamilton had used their challenge earlier in the game, so they did could not challenge the play.

Prior to the start of their 2011 season, the National Football League instituted a new rule that sees every scoring play reviewed automatically by the replay booth to ensure that the correct call was made. It is a great rule, one that prevents coaches for using challenges to review scoring plays while also making sure that the correct call is made. Scoring plays are the most crucial calls in the game, and an incorrect one could be the difference between winning and losing. (For the record, Hamilton lost to Montreal 27-25.)

The CFL however, has no such rule in place, but they should.

In fact, the CFL should take it one step further and make all potential scoring plays automatically reviewable. This way, a mistake such as the one made on the play above does not stand. Or, the ruling on the field does stand and everyone from player to coach to media member to fan can get a clear interpretation on what is and isn't a catch.

I put this same idea out there earlier in the week, both here and on various CFL-related fora, and the response is mixed. Not-so-surprisingly, it seems that the vast majority of Tiger-Cat fans are behind such a rule change, while fans of other teams – mostly Montreal Alouette fans – are the ones most strenuously objecting to it.

What seems to be the main point of contention is that adding these replays would make the games last longer.

That's a nonsense claim.

First off, the games have not lasted much longer in the NFL this season with their rule change. Secondly, any additional time added-on to games because of this rule would benefit, not detract, for the overall enjoyment of the game. It's more important to get the call right than to get the call quickly.

The human element will always be a part of football, but the ability to make sure the correct call gets made is available. It seems illogical to stand in the way of progress.

I hope the CFL seriously considers making this small, but crucial change prior to the start of the 2012 season.

CFL Rule Changes

The CFL announced today that they have made four rule changes for the 2010 season:

• Two-point converts on all scores in overtime
• Allowing a team to scrimmage from the 35-yard line after field goals
• No pass interference on throws deemed "uncatchable"
• Balls hitting the ground on punts and touched by the kicking team will be penalized only 5 yards instead of 15

Let's look at these one by one, shall we?

The two-point convert rule, to me, does nothing. I outlined previously what I thought the league should do to change overtime so that ties would no longer exist. That may not have been the stated goal of changing the OT procedures, but if it wasn't, I ask, why make any change? If the CFL really wanted to be proactive they would've gone one step further and found a way to stop ties. The league didn't do that, so this rule, to me, means very little. I won't go into detail about this, but if you want to read my thoughts on OT changes you can click the link.

The rule that allows for teams to scrimmage at the 35-yard line after a field goal is just a reversion back to an old rule, which, I believe, was changed only in the last season or two. I'm neither here nor there on this change, but I think I'm more against the rule than I am for it. Growing up playing and watching football it was always preached to me that there were three aspects to the game: offense, defense, special teams. Taking out one aspect, as this rule does, takes away a part of the game. One of the areas I always thought the CFL had up on the NFL was kick returns. The larger field giving players more room to move allowed for some exciting plays. Rocket Ismail, Henry "Gizmo" Williams and Bashir Levingston (just to name a few) were dynamic and exciting kick returners. They added to the game, and depriving fans of one of the most exciting aspects of the game doesn't sit well with me.

No pass interference on uncatchable balls is a good change. This probably wouldn't have stopped guys like Bo Smith from being turned into a human turnstile, but at least the change will stop unnecessary PA penalties from being called. The only downside to this change is that it adds another layer of judgment for the referees. Refs have it tough at the best of times; now they'll get the endless barrage of critique on whether a pass was catchable or not.

The final rule instituted is the one for punts. All I'll say about this is: ABOUT DAMN TIME. I like the 5-yard rule to allow for punt returns, but I hated that an awkward kick could penalize a team so drastically. Now, if the league would only change it so that teams could recover kicks that hit an opposing player regardless of the 5-yard zone, then we'll have a close-to-perfect rule.

All in all I'd say the rules changes don't change much. None of them are too negative or positive, and for the most part I doubt many fans will notice. The one thing I have liked about the recent changes is the league's consultation process with the fans. Even if we don't have a say, it's nice to know that we have a forum that allows us to express our pleasure or displeasure with the product the CFL puts out.

More Overtime Talk

I have talked about changes to the CFL's overtime format previously. At the time the CFL was taking fan submissions on potential changes to the system. I advocated a couple myself, and I sent them in to the league to be considered. Well, it looks like they have finally made a recommendation, and I must admit I find it a little odd.

This week, the CFL announced that they would look into making a change to the overtime system that would have a team be forced to attempt a two-point conversion after any TD scored in OT.

This seems more like a tweak than an overhaul or even a real change. I guess the point is that it could lead to fewer ties, with two-point converts being harder to get than the traditional extra-point kick. However, this seems like change for change's sake.

In my previous entry on OT changes, I stated that going for two would be advisable, but only after having already played two full OT periods with no winner having emerged. I guess the CFL decided that this was close enough.

My problem with this recommendation is that it still does not rectify the issues of ties. The teams will still play only two OT periods and if the game is still tied, the game is still tied. Let's be honest, no one likes ties, and games that end in ties are wholly unsatisfying. The saying that a tie is like kissing your sister exists for a reason. This rule will probably make ties less likely, but it won't eradicate them altogether.

I must stress that the rule has not been implemented yet; the league will not make a decision on this change until the spring. It seems inevitable, however, that this will be the new OT reality in the Canadian Football League.

Overtime in the CFL

The CFL, which I believe to be one of the most fan-interactive leagues in North America, is asking its fans to make suggestions on a new overtime format. If you are interested in making your voice heard you can go to the CFL's website and send in your suggestions. The deadline is February 15, 2010.

Last season the league asked fans to make rule-change suggestions, and the CFL adopted four new rules, most notably the allowance for the "Wildcat" offense that was all the rage at the time thanks to the NFL's Miami Dolphins.

This season the league has specifically asked fans for input on how to improve overtime. I must say that I tend to view the CFL's version of overtime rather positively. Unlike the NFL, which goes to sudden death, the CFL stipulates that both teams get the ball on offense with the opportunity to score. The system in place is almost identical to that of the NCAA with one minor exception, which is also the first thing I'd change about the CFL system: TIES!

In the NCAA, overtime continues until there is a winner. The CFL allows for two possessions for each team, max. In the NCAA, after two possessions the teams keep playing, except after any TD the offense must go for two points, instead of kicking the traditional one point. I would suggest that this should be adopted in the CFL. No one likes ties, and this would be a great way to get rid of them.

The second way I'd change overtime is instead of placing the ball at the 35-yard line, which basically guarantees a field goal, have the offense start from the 45- or 55-yard line. This way points aren't guaranteed, and the offense actually has to work for the points.

If the league chooses to keep the rules exactly as constituted currently, I will not be upset. At least in the CFL each team is provided with the opportunity on offense to score a field goal or touchdown; it's not a coin flip that decide who has the chance to win. The CFL overtime system is at least fair, and with these minor tweaks that I have submitted to the league I believe the CFL would then be able to boast about having the BEST overtime system in all of sports.