Proposed rule changes

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12592
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

The CFL rules committee has proposed several changes in the way replay reviews are used, as well as the following three changes in playing rules:
- To promote player safety, the committee is suggesting only blocking above the defender’s waist be allowed following a completed pass across the line of scrimmage. Blocking below the waist on such a play would result in a 10 yard penalty. Blocking below the waist had previously been eliminated on kick returns, interception returns, and fumble returns. It would still be allowed on running plays and passes completed behind the line of scrimmage.

- When a punt goes out of bounds in flight in between the 20 yard lines, the committee is suggesting the receiving team should have the option of taking the ball where it went out of bounds plus a ten yard penalty against the kicking team, or requiring the kicking team to re-kick ten yards back from the original line of scrimmage. Currently, the receiving team can either take the ball where it went out of bounds or require a re-kick ten yards back.
- The committee is suggesting that if a player is pushed out of bounds by an opponent, he can return to the field of play and make a play. If he goes out of bounds on his own, or is bumped out of bounds by a teammate, he cannot legally participate in the play. This would clarify the current version of the rule, which does not specify bodily contact from an opponent.
The punting rule is the most significant. I've long wanted to see the receiving team have the option of taking the ball where it went out of bounds, plus a 10-yard penalty, rather than have the option of taking it where it went out or having the kicking team re-kick with a 10-yard penalty. The existing rule usually resulted in no penalty at all to the kicking team.

CFL Rules Committee makes recommendations
User avatar
Anglophone
All Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:03 pm

The punting one should be a given, I think. As with the video review changes. I'm not exactly sure what the difference is with the eligible player change, as I thought that that was how the league functioned right now.

The blocking one is probably going to be debated, but I think it will go through.
User avatar
Big Time
Champion
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2003 6:45 pm

Hate, hate, HATE this proposed block rule. I think there are far too many illegal block penalties already on kick offs. In fact, for a league that does the most to ensure there are kick off returns, I feel for years they have destroyed the excitement of this play because of the numerous phantom illegal blocking plays that mitigate almost every big play. It's now become common that for every kickoff/punt return, I don't even cheer until I'm sure there are no flags. That they are thinking about extending this to regular offensive plays makes me sick. You can bet that if they implement this it will be the first rule that they change next season. They will absolutely kill the excitement of the game with this rule, mark my words.
User avatar
Rammer
Team Captain
Posts: 22320
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 6:04 pm
Location: Coquitlam, B.C.

I would like the league to adopt the 5 yard no yards rule to be implemented at the end of the play, regardless of field advancement. So if a player rips off 20 yards after the no yards infringement, there would be an additional 5 yards tacked on. I don't like the either or call currently, as teams tend to not take that very seriously.
Entertainment value = an all time low
MacNews
Team Captain
Posts: 3942
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 12:48 pm

I am worried about the punting rule because I don't want every punt to have to be...re-punted. That takes too long.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

I've never been a fan of the rouge (single point). To me, it belongs to a long ago era, 3 yards and a cloud of dust, when field position was everything.

When the game is on the line in the 4th quarter, it seems dumb to me to have a fire drill in the end zone as players try to corral the ball and then kick it back out. To me it cheapens the game.

As a compromise, I might suggest keeping the rouge for 3 quarters. It does show some game domination if you score some on punts or missed FGs. But disallow the single point in the 4th quarter.

Just IMO. I know there are countless advocates of the rouge.
.........

http://cfldb.ca/rulebook/scoring/definitions/
Article 4 — Single Point Or Rouge#

If the ball is kicked into the Goal Area by an opponent, a rouge is scored:
when the ball becomes dead in possession of a team in its own Goal Area or,
when the ball touches or crosses the Dead Line or a Sideline in Goal, and touches the ground, a player or some object beyond these lines.

AR: Team A kicks to Team B. B1 attempting to catch the ball on Team B's 3-yard line, fumbles it and is tackled with the ball in possession in the Team B Goal Area. RULING — Rouge (ball deemed to have been kicked into Goal Area by Team A).

AR: Team A kicks to Team B. B1 catches the ball in the Field of Play while moving towards own Goal Line and, in the judgment of the official, the momentum carries B1 into own Goal Area. RULING — Rouge (possession deemed to have been gained in the Goal Area).

After a rouge, the team scored against shall next put the ball into play by a scrimmage as first down at any point between the hash marks on its 35-yard line.

If the single point was scored as the result of an unsuccessful field goal attempt, the team scored against may elect to scrimmage the ball at any point between the hash marks on its own 35-yard line or at the previous line of scrimmage.

NOTE: For the purposes of this Article, a drop kick or place kick shall, without exception, be deemed to be a field goal attempt.

NOTE: If during a kickoff, the kicked ball proceeds through the Goal Area and across the Dead Line or Sideline in Goal without being touched, there shall be no score and the ball shall be awarded to the receiving team at any point between the hash marks on its own 25-yard line.
Is it possible that some fans like the rule, but not the name, rouge?
..........

http://www.sportsnet.ca/football/cfl/20 ... the_rouge/

Nice punt at the end by the announcer in the V jersey. Ha ha
..........



Looked like a rugby game broke out. Or an Aussie Rules game or Irish Hurling.

The funny thing here to me is Rod Black's voice. He gets so excited his voice goes very high and squeaky. Ha ha
.............



Same play, different tape.
User avatar
Anglophone
All Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:03 pm

Rammer wrote:I would like the league to adopt the 5 yard no yards rule to be implemented at the end of the play, regardless of field advancement. So if a player rips off 20 yards after the no yards infringement, there would be an additional 5 yards tacked on. I don't like the either or call currently, as teams tend to not take that very seriously.
I have wondered why this is not the case already. It only makes sense to me.
MacNews wrote:I am worried about the punting rule because I don't want every punt to have to be...re-punted. That takes too long.
My understanding of the proposed change is that it would minimize the amount of re-punts.
WestCoast
prospect
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:30 am

- Well said Big Time.
- Where'd this rouge ever come from? Don't mess with the Single Point rule!
- We have the best overtime there is.
User avatar
Toppy Vann
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9794
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm

JohnHenry wrote:The proposed 10-yard penalty on shanked punts will force teams to punt into the field of play, which is probably a good move. Not sure about the blocking rule. Sometimes they go a bit overboard with all the technicalities of what is a legal hit in pro sports these days.

Here's another vote to keep the rouge. The exciting punt-in, punt-back-out play, at the end of some 1 point games, probably only happens once every 5 years. It's different from American football, but I don't think it cheapens the league.
I would be horrified if they take that out of the Canadian game. It used to happen much more often when players were both kickers and defensive or offensive players or multi-skilled. While those days are gone nothing is more exciting than the kick in - kick out scenario.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
User avatar
KnowItAll
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7458
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:32 pm
Location: Delta

Toppy Vann wrote:
JohnHenry wrote:The proposed 10-yard penalty on shanked punts will force teams to punt into the field of play, which is probably a good move. Not sure about the blocking rule. Sometimes they go a bit overboard with all the technicalities of what is a legal hit in pro sports these days.

Here's another vote to keep the rouge. The exciting punt-in, punt-back-out play, at the end of some 1 point games, probably only happens once every 5 years. It's different from American football, but I don't think it cheapens the league.
I would be horrified if they take that out of the Canadian game. It used to happen much more often when players were both kickers and defensive or offensive players or multi-skilled. While those days are gone nothing is more exciting than the kick in - kick out scenario.
I dunno, I think a kick return for a td is pretty exciting.
Every day that passes is one you can't get back
User avatar
Anglophone
All Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:03 pm

WestCoast wrote:- We have the best overtime there is.
What.
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8218
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG when not at BC Place, Grey Cup or Mazatlan.

Removing the rouge would only serve to neuter what can be a very exciting part of the Canadian game. Removing it also would remove a strategic element of the game. I've followed the numbers and have found them to be fairly consistent and pointing to the rouge as being far less of a factor in the grand scheme of things than its detractors would lead everybody to believe. Usually the occurance of a rouge from a missed field goal happens on average of once every 2 games. I look at the rouge much as I look at the no yards rule. What both rules do is put the ball into the hands of some of the most exciting players in the game. The rouge always has been about forcing the returning team to make a play or surrender a penalty in the form of a point. In 2011 there were more points scored by MFG TD returns than rouges from MFGs.

Some numbers from 2011:
FG Attempts: 385
FGs Missed: 85
Rouges off missed FGs: 31 in 72 games - normally it's closer to 40
MFG returns: 43 for 1751 yards and 6 TDs - 6 in the same season may be a record.
Punts: 975
Rouges off punts: 51
KOs: 685
Rouges off KOs: 10
You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8218
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG when not at BC Place, Grey Cup or Mazatlan.

Anglophone wrote:
WestCoast wrote:- We have the best overtime there is.
What.
I'll agree with you on that Anglophone. I much prefered the previous format with the two 5 minute halfs.
You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
Anglophone
All Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:03 pm

Hambone wrote:
Anglophone wrote:
WestCoast wrote:- We have the best overtime there is.
What.
I'll agree with you on that Anglophone. I much prefered the previous format with the two 5 minute halfs.
That could actually be exciting! I really think that we should go back to it.
Post Reply