JCon said:  "

I don't have a problem with them imposing the rules. My point is that the refing is very inconsistent from play to play, week to week. The quality of refing is very low in the CFL. The poor refing is not incidentally because it can have, and has had, a direct impacted the result of the games."

I think the league could spend a lot more money on officiating such as :

1] Making the position a full time job

2] Continuous training of said officials and review using the latest technology

3] Imitate how the NFL trains and develops its officials ... hire the same way ... many college refs would love to become full time professionals ... also former Canadian football players would love to extend their time in the game...

Unless and until there is  a significant improvement in the quality and accuracy of the officiating calls, to protect themselves teams need more - - not less - - reviews. THIS IS CRUCIAL to the integrity of the game and the growth of our fan interest/base.

I know good reviews take more time but bad calls are too big a turn off to the marginal fans we need to grow our game. 

Here is what I propose:

1] a slight change in the rules to adjust for slight infractions away from the play  ... slight contact on a receiver, blocking on kick returns, holding and the like ... this means not over turning plays because the officials are using some common sense discretion  and "fairness" ie there are constant small infractions going on all over the field. Teams should not be able to take advantage of this.

2] adjusting for the speed of live play instead of the more accurate slow motion; for example  the Loffler hit on Arcenaux during the BC playoff game ... that call was a game changer ... in other words not over turning normal human judgment calls as a matter of practice ... over turn the egrecious errors in judgment only ... take away the picky technicality in favor of supporting normal judgment and on field pragmatic decisions giving back discretion to the official and NOT deferring decisions to the replay - - make the official make an on the spot decision instead of failing to decide in order to defer to the camera... this puts the burden on the official reviewer who should be the very best, not the very least, officials we have ( and who would be paid the best) meaning we have good discretion supporting the officials but knowing when to draw the line on a bad call.

The head referee may announce "the infraction was away from the play and will not be enforced"... or "the call was within the discretion of the official ruling at game speed and will not be over turned" ... etc.

3] Give teams unlimited reviews as long as they are right on the calls they protest. Teams get to be wrong on their request for reviews only twice ... and when they are wrong they will be charged a ten yard delay of game penalty ... this will deter teams from throwing the yellow flag unless they are sure of their protest ... throwing that flag will occur less just because it could be a game changer or because it is a blatant un-costly attempt to get lucky at a critical time.

I know more reviews slow the game but as long as they correct true officiating errors there is a certain satisfaction in justice being served. Fan frustration comes from the delays resulting from frivolous/marginal protests.

Who believes the extra reviews to get it right is  worth it to the well being of the league and the fans?

Edited November 25, 20169 yr by BigBlue

6 hours ago, Esks1975 said:

The most egregious of the blown calls was Jorden knocking down the DB in the end zone? The on-field officials correctly made that call. How that was changed to PI was truly amazing.

Well hey, he could've purposely tripped and fallen right in front of him. 

On ‎11‎/‎27‎/‎2016 at 11:48 PM, BigBlue said:

I think you would have to prove your 20-30 minutes ... but even if that were true I don't mind the time because I love football, every second of it ... besides there is a certain satisfaction in seeing an official judged wrong ... and they will be judged right a maximum of 4 times per game under the scenario I am suggesting ... more importantly, the more overturned calls there is (to the point of embarassment) the more likely it is the CFL will finally decide to improve its officiating

I love football too.

I don't love getting home at 1:30 AM from the stadium when I work the next day.

6 hours ago, Esks1975 said:

The most egregious of the blown calls was Jorden knocking down the DB in the end zone? The on-field officials correctly made that call. How that was changed to PI was truly amazing.

Interference takes place when a player obstructs, blocks, screens or charges towards an opponent, with or without direct contact, in such a manner that prevents the opponent’s approach to the ball carrier, potential ball carrier or the ball. Blocking is identified as the act of creating interference with contact.

Jorden was going towards the ball. DB was not.

Edited November 29, 20169 yr by JCon

Get rid of reviews for illegal contact and put a time limit of 90 seconds on the rest of them.

7 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

Get rid of reviews for illegal contact and put a time limit of 90 seconds on the rest of them.

I think there should be a time limit on reviews.

I also think the coaches should have to have throw the challenge flag within 10 seconds of the either the play ending or a penalty being called.

I believe they need to keep the PI reviews until the refs get better.

1 hour ago, Mike said:

I love football too.

I don't love getting home at 1:30 AM from the stadium when I work the next day.

getting home at 1:30 is a parking problem ... its hysteria to think that overturning blown reff calls will add two to two and a half of time to a cfl game ... the proposition is you can only be wrong twice before losing all challenges and that "slight" calls away from the play be done away ... get real

2 minutes ago, BigBlue said:

getting home at 1:30 is a parking problem ... its hysteria to think that overturning blown reff calls will add two to two and a half of time to a cfl game ... the proposition is you can only be wrong twice before losing all challenges and that "slight" calls away from the play be done away ... get real

Maybe he was referring to the game that was delayed by the storm?

 

They tried the time limit on reviews, they always went over it in the name of getting the call right. Honestly just ditch reviews entirely, let the refs do their jobs and we will live with the mistakes

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

They tried the time limit on reviews, they always went over it in the name of getting the call right. Honestly just ditch reviews entirely, let the refs do their jobs and we will live with the mistakes

That would be the worst possible world for Blue Bomber fans ... you think some of the reffs are biased now, let them be unbridled with no reviews ... and you will never see a memo from CFL HQ's to the reffs telling them to be more fair to Winnipeg!

No self defense to protect us from the reffs bad moods about having to work in Winnipeg ... are you nuts?

8 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

They tried the time limit on reviews, they always went over it in the name of getting the call right. Honestly just ditch reviews entirely, let the refs do their jobs and we will live with the mistakes

They just need to stick to it. Kill the feed completely after 90 seconds.

I want obvious blown calls to be fixed. IMO that's what replay should be for. The ones where they have to study it in slo-mo for 15 minutes are what we need to get rid of.

5 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

They just need to stick to it. Kill the feed completely after 90 seconds.

I want obvious blown calls to be fixed. IMO that's what replay should be for. The ones where they have to study it in slo-mo for 15 minutes are what we need to get rid of.

I like the idea of forbidding slo-mo except for whether a player stepped out of bounds ... otherwise 90 seconds is more thah enough ... bravo

1 hour ago, BigBlue said:

That would be the worst possible world for Blue Bomber fans ... you think some of the reffs are biased now, let them be unbridled with no reviews ... and you will never see a memo from CFL HQ's to the reffs telling them to be more fair to Winnipeg!

No self defense to protect us from the reffs bad moods about having to work in Winnipeg ... are you nuts?

No I don't think refs are biased now. There is a difference between bias and incompetence. The CFL refs just aren't very good at their jobs and in my opinion the review process makes it easier for them to be bad at their jobs because they don't have to worry about making mistakes, replay will fix it. Without that crutch they would have to improve or they'd be out of a job. 

20 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

No I don't think refs are biased now. There is a difference between bias and incompetence. The CFL refs just aren't very good at their jobs and in my opinion the review process makes it easier for them to be bad at their jobs because they don't have to worry about making mistakes, replay will fix it. Without that crutch they would have to improve or they'd be out of a job. 

I don't think they're bias, just incompetent.

However, I don't agree that removing reviews will lead to an improvement. Reviews were implemented due to poor refing, not because it was going so well. I think you can do both, improve the review process and improve refing.

Reffing in the CFL is no different than ANY organized sport. There are going to be mistakes. And a lot of them are in the fans' minds. I don't know how many times I've heard calls for penalties that are not penalties. And vice versa, the infamous missed calls. The fans see missed calls and the refs see calls that the fans miss. 

What the CFL is doing with reviews is commendable. The 1st model didn't work so well, but they're working on it. Less challenges, quicker decisions being rendered, and usually, the correct call.

But they do have to streamline it. SLO-Mo should only be used to determine out of bounds or contact with the ground. Not with any kind of contact.

It has been an effective tool, but it has been mis-used. Can they fix it off season? Of course they can. The officials, and  the Coaches now have better parameters to streamline the wording. They'll get something they can agree on, and we'll get closer to what we all want - better results.

Edited November 29, 20169 yr by Mr Dee

Personally, if it takes a review ref more than 60 seconds to come to a decision, then the play was so close that the call on the field should automatically stand.  There's either clear evidence or there isn't.

3 hours ago, BigBlue said:

That would be the worst possible world for Blue Bomber fans ... you think some of the reffs are biased now, let them be unbridled with no reviews ... and you will never see a memo from CFL HQ's to the reffs telling them to be more fair to Winnipeg!

No self defense to protect us from the reffs bad moods about having to work in Winnipeg ... are you nuts?

Dude, seriously?  You actually think that there are refs out there going "Please give me a Bomber game to call cause I want to completely screw them over."  Ya, ok then. 

The NFL has full time refs and their officiating is, at times, BRUTAL! Would full time refs improve our product? Maybe slightly at best. One thing that needs to improve, besides all the challenges, is that "ref in the sky", the ref in the booth. He was supposed to correct the mistakes, but the guy did next to nothing.Waste of a salary if you ask me.

Human refs are inherently flawed. They should be replaced by a network of sky-cams using artificial intelligence.

4 hours ago, sweep the leg said:

They just need to stick to it. Kill the feed completely after 90 seconds.

I want obvious blown calls to be fixed. IMO that's what replay should be for. The ones where they have to study it in slo-mo for 15 minutes are what we need to get rid of.

I have to agree. Let's not throw baby out with the bath water.

1 hour ago, WBBFanWest said:

Dude, seriously?  You actually think that there are refs out there going "Please give me a Bomber game to call cause I want to completely screw them over."  Ya, ok then. 

No I don't think that's happening. With refs the bias may be the other way. Not against one particular team, but in favour of a particular team. For example, if you're an offensive lineman, you may get away with holding more often if you play for team x but not team y. 

10 minutes ago, J5V said:

No I don't think that's happening. With refs the bias may be the other way. Not against one particular team, but in favour of a particular team. For example, if you're an offensive lineman, you may get away with holding more often if you play for team x but not team y. 

Ya, that's equally laughable.  So you're suggesting that this is the case "Please give me a Rider game because they're just sooooo dreamy."  Actually, I take that back.  It's not equally laughable, it's much more laughable.  You would, of course, have some evidence to back this up, or is this another one of those "opinions" that you like to fling around?

2 hours ago, blueingreenland said:

The NFL has full time refs and their officiating is, at times, BRUTAL! Would full time refs improve our product? Maybe slightly at best. One thing that needs to improve, besides all the challenges, is that "ref in the sky", the ref in the booth. He was supposed to correct the mistakes, but the guy did next to nothing.Waste of a salary if you ask me.

The NFL refs are not 'full time'.  They are discussing making them full time. 

2 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

Ya, that's equally laughable.  So you're suggesting that this is the case "Please give me a Rider game because they're just sooooo dreamy."  Actually, I take that back.  It's not equally laughable, it's much more laughable.  You would, of course, have some evidence to back this up, or is this another one of those "opinions" that you like to fling around?

I don't like to fling opinions around, I LOVE to fling opinions around, especially here. 

And yes, I do believe it's possible that some teams get a break from the officials from time to time. You know it's true. Hell, I've seen Wally ***** and moan his way into many such "breaks". For evidence, watch BC's last game against us. 

The cheesiest feature of the modern CFL is the desperation fishing expedition where the coach looks for a chintzy illegal contact penalty to keep a drive alive.  Appeals should be for courtrooms, not sports fields.

But if we've gotta have PI challenges in the game, how about limiting them to just the intended receiver?  And I like the idea of allowing slow motion only under certain circumstances, like for fumbles and sideline calls.

I've got a lot of sympathy for the officials.  Seven guys have to watch 24 players across thousands of square yards of field and they have to judge plays that last tenths of a second where tiny details like hand placement matter. I'm impressed they get it right as often as they do.  I think that the game may be too fast for human beings to officiate perfectly.

8 minutes ago, johnzo said:

The cheesiest feature of the modern CFL is the desperation fishing expedition where the coach looks for a chintzy illegal contact penalty to keep a drive alive.  Appeals should be for courtrooms, not sports fields.

But if we've gotta have PI challenges in the game, how about limiting them to just the intended receiver?  And I like the idea of allowing slow motion only under certain circumstances, like for fumbles and sideline calls.

I've got a lot of sympathy for the officials.  Seven guys have to watch 24 players across thousands of square yards of field and they have to judge plays that last tenths of a second where tiny details like hand placement matter. I'm impressed they get it right as often as they do.  I think that the game may be too fast for human beings to officiate perfectly.

This was one of the most enjoyable Grey Cup games and the officials did it right.

Only 11 penalties.. That is fantastic. 

A CFL statistic, according to a source reported by Rod Pedersen, had the offiating with a 97% success rate.

That means there was a lot of fan'atical blithering over 3%.

Mind you, those were some bad, bad calls in that tiny percentage.?