Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: #WhatAboutKaren

  1. #21
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 26,888, Level: 97
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 462
    Overall activity: 84.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Stratford
    Posts
    5,555
    Points
    26,888
    Level
    97
    With all the technology available, just use it when necessary to help out the refs on the field.

  2. #22
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 31,542, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 84.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    Argo57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    7,127
    Points
    31,542
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by gilthethrill View Post
    With all the technology available, just use it when necessary to help out the refs on the field.
    You mean like video replay?
    How's that working out?
    Toronto Argonauts
    18 Time World Champions

  3. #23
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 52,895, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Section 124, Row 19
    Posts
    8,759
    Points
    52,895
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Topshelf View Post
    Anyone who thinks the CFL has unbiased officiating has their head in the sand.
    The CFL uses local refs.
    If, say the Argos are on the road, in first place, playing the Riders who need to win to make it to playoffs. The Riders are winning. Even if it takes 20 phantom calls.
    Just wait til September, and if you think how does the league want this result, it comes up 9 times out of 10. Especially when it comes to Western teams.
    That call that cost the lady the million does not get made if it's a bomber returning the kick. Guaranteed.
    As for the video review booth? Its Jake Ireland. He's pushing 90 and a cfl lifer. Knows the company line,
    Better in the sand than elsewhere, I guess.
    Year of the Rocket: John Candy, Wayne Gretzky, a Crooked Tycoon, and the Craziest Season in Football History (https://sutherlandhousebooks.com/pro...of-the-rocket/)

    Bouncing Back: From National Joke to Grey Cup Champs (https://bit.ly/3fvip5x)

    YOTR YouTube https://bit.ly/37jtG4f
    BB YouTube https://bit.ly/2TSYPs7

  4. #24
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 33,273, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.8%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6,747
    Points
    33,273
    Level
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Topshelf View Post
    Anyone who thinks the CFL has unbiased officiating has their head in the sand.
    The CFL uses local refs.
    If, say the Argos are on the road, in first place, playing the Riders who need to win to make it to playoffs. The Riders are winning. Even if it takes 20 phantom calls.
    Just wait til September, and if you think how does the league want this result, it comes up 9 times out of 10. Especially when it comes to Western teams.
    That call that cost the lady the million does not get made if it's a bomber returning the kick. Guaranteed.
    As for the video review booth? Its Jake Ireland. He's pushing 90 and a cfl lifer. Knows the company line,

    Your idea that there is that kind of bias in CFL reffing is ludicrous/laughable - IMO.

    OTOH - CFL reffing could improve, big-time; way too many over zealous calls that were not really necessary as they did not affect the play; and replay review unable to over-turn obvious mistake calls on the field - this part is frustrating and difficult to understand - maybe the Command Centre is staffed by a gutless wimp who is afraid to hurt the feelings of his on-field officials brethren ? Both of these problems are easily addressable - by new Commish Ambrosie - fire all refs who continue to make dumb, over-zealous, flag-happy calls; and get a new Command Center staff - and make it 3 veteran guys who know the rules and understand the game, and have them make a (swift) decision on calls, with a majority decision surely able to over-turn one guy who is afraid or blind to make the correction.

  5. #25
    Bleeds Double Blue
    Points: 16,835, Level: 82
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 15
    Overall activity: 21.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    argolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,614
    Points
    16,835
    Level
    82
    I don't buy any kind of officials conspiracy. With much more passing, spread formations, speed, and greater emphasis on kick returns in today's game, it's just a way harder game to call. We also see everything right away with super slo-mo HD/4K replays.

    In terms of the number of rules and the ground they had to cover, refs had a lot less to do in the old days when most teams used tight formations almost exclusively and ran more than half the time. Before 1975, blocking was illegal on punt returns, which meant eleven guys on the return team were relegated to standing around after the ball was caught.

    Here are the eight penalties that can be challenged:
    The following penalties may be challenged by the coach whether they were
    called or not called during play
    • Defensive Pass Interference
    • Illegal Contact on a Receiver
    • Offensive Pass Interference
    • Illegal Interference – Blocking Downfield on a pass play
    Note: Should any of the above 4 penalties be challenged, all 4 types will be
    ruled on
    • Roughing the Passer
    • Roughing or Contacting the Kicker
    • No Yards

    The following penalty may be challenged by the coach ONLY if it was called
    during play
    • Illegal Block Penalties on Kick Plays
    I didn't even know illegal blocks on kicks could be challenged. Not sure any coach knows since I can't remember one being challenged. Same deal with no yards.

    I think the biggest problem by far is illegal contact. Why can that 10 yard infraction be challenged, and not something like holding? And who wants to see an I.C. challenge against a player who wasn't covering the intended receiver? I also think receivers are now sometimes "accidentally" running into DBs to give teams the option of a challenge.

    It's obvious challenges are not going away. If I could reform the rule, I'd only allow them for pass interference and major fouls, in other words only penalties that result in an automatic first down. I also wouldn't be opposed to imposing a ten yard penalty for a failed challenge instead of a lost timeout.

    At the very least, the illegal contact challenge has to go!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts