More video review ?

[R.J]

God, I hope not.

http://www.tsn.ca/video-review-changes-could-be-in-works-for-cfl-1.446603

http://www.tsn.ca/lawless-rule-change-could-eliminate-hundreds-of-penalties-1.446695
Limiting penalties and getting them right should be the priority IMO.

[Golden Fleece]

Limiting penalties and getting them right should be the priority IMO. Agreed. The home opener against Saskatchewan last year was a nightmare. No flow. Ref got more time on the jumbotron than any player.

[R.J]

Looks like it's one step closer; among other things.
http://www.tsn.ca/cfl-rules-committee-recommends-eye-in-the-sky-official-1.451523
http://www.cfl.ca/2016/03/10/rules-committee-2016/

[Argo57]

Upgrade the officials themselves, more video replay will big the game down even more.

[R.J]

Upgrade the officials themselves, more video replay will big the game down even more.
I really don't understand how the in the League's, GM's and Coaches eyes - more voices to deliberate, more penalties added to the already long list, and more things allowed to challenge on = speeding up the game. I for one am growing very frustrated with the League as of late and considering the drops in attendance, tv viewership, and chatter around CFL fanbases - it appears I'm not the only one.

[ArgoRavi]

I will be the dissenting opinion here and say that the league is getting this right. The following column is a good read and discusses how the league is getting this right: http://slam.canoe.com/Slam/Football/CFL/News/2016/03/10/22612304.html

[Argo57]

I will be the dissenting opinion here and say that the league is getting this right. The following column is a good read and discusses how the league is getting this right: http://slam.canoe.com/Slam/Football/CFL/News/2016/03/10/22612304.html

They couldn't "get it right" last season with video replay.
How many bad calls weren't overturned last season due to "lack of evidence" when it was clear to all that it should have been so.
More coaches challenges, great stuff!!
I'll say it again, the root of the problem is the officials themselves, some of them aren't very good at all.

[Golden Fleece]

I'll say it again, the root of the problem is the officials themselves, some of them aren't very good at all. Is it the on field officials or the directives they receive from the league itself? We don't even know how they get graded. An official might not want to risk not throwing a flag on an infraction away from the play because they know it will count against them. The reduction of rules mentioned in ArgoRavi's article link suggest the league recognized their own role in the problem. I'm willing to give them this year to see if this helps reduce the flags per game.

[AngeloV]

I've hated the PI challenge from the beginning, so I don't think I'll be happy with more challenges being allowed. What I hate most is that a play that the official deemed legal originally can be changed to a 50 yard penalty. I think that is ridiculous. I would prefer to have a booth called PI only be a 15 yard penalty rather than a spot foul. Ottawa just might be defending cup champs if that were the case, but would prefer to just allow the officials to call the game.

[Golden Fleece]

I've hated the PI challenge from the beginning, so I don't think I'll be happy with more challenges being allowed. What I hate most is that a play that the official deemed legal originally can be changed to a 50 yard penalty. I think that is ridiculous. I would prefer to have a booth called PI only be a 15 yard penalty rather than a spot foul. Ottawa just might be defending cup champs if that were the case, but would prefer to just allow the officials to call the game. Agreed. Don't like the PI challenge but your yardage idea is definitely the lesser evil.

[R.J]

I've hated the PI challenge from the beginning, so I don't think I'll be happy with more challenges being allowed. What I hate most is that a play that the official deemed legal originally can be changed to a 50 yard penalty. I think that is ridiculous. I would prefer to have a booth called PI only be a 15 yard penalty rather than a spot foul. Ottawa just might be defending cup champs if that were the case, but would prefer to just allow the officials to call the game.
I'm not completely opposed to video review in general as I think they should be getting it right, but the problem is there's too much and they still don't always get it right - The Grey cup was a perfect example of it. One of the PI calls was right - the other was iffy at best IMO. Though I will admit that I'm glad Ottawa didn't win because of missed calls - actually I'm happy Ottawa didn't win in general lol.

I would also prefer to just allow the refs to call the game, but as 57 stated - the problem here is the refs themselves. Video review can also be a good thing; anyone else recall the Anthony Calvillo "touchdown" in the 2003 Eastern Final ? That's something which could have been rectified.

[Reggiemac]

The coaches were responsible for a lot of the penalties. The refs have to call them as they see them. i would like to see the roughing the passer penalty cleaned up by creating a contacting the QB with a lesser penalty than roughing the passer. Seen too many situations where the
QB was barely touched and earned the roughing penalty. In fact in one stampeder game there were two roughing th QB called that on review showed clearly that the stamp player didn't even touch the QB.

[AngeloV]

i would like to see the roughing the passer penalty cleaned up by creating a contacting the QB with a lesser penalty than roughing the passer.

That would be a great idea.