Finally...an end to the madness and the fishing for stuff that has no bearing on the play

I hope we haven't thrown the baby out with the bathwater.. Have to give this a little time before commenting further....I know it was slowing the game, but isn't it more important to get the play right if an infraction has occurred...I guess there was no other way to stop the slowing of the game and obvious abuse by coaches...We shall see.

Love it! ANY time a big play happens the opposing head coach is immediately waiting to see if there's an inconsequential penalty on the other side of the field to challenge.

THAT'S what I see being eliminated here. This is forcing the coaches to save their challenge for when an inevitable blown call happens once a game. I'm totally fine with it.

50 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Remove challenges on illegal contact, but allow them for PI.

If the rule cannot be enforced consistently, then it is not a well-defined rule and certainly not challengeable.

This would have been a much better step to solving the problem... I feel like the change they made might help... but it really doesn't solve the overall problem problem...

23 minutes ago, Jaxon said:

Generally, I'm in favour of this.   To be honest though, I would have been just as happy to see them make PI and Illegal Contact non-challengable, and leave the coaches with 2 challenges for catch/fumble/out of bounds situations, replenished if they are correct.     Challenging PI and Illegal contact, along with Roughing the Passer is what has dramatically slowed the game down.  As was said earlier, there is no doubt in my mind that coaches designed plays to create contact knowing that they could challenge for illegal contact on a play.   It was getting silly.

I was thinking the other day of the cost/benefits of the challenges, and I think that in general, I enjoyed the game more in the pre-review days.

Agree with this post 100%.

Screw it all. Have no refs and no rules. School yard style where everything goes! Would make for a very entertaining game!

There's an awful lot of talk about games being slowed down but for some reason they still seem to fit in the same 3-hour timeslot they always did.

I don't like rule changes mid-season.  That is what the offseason review processes are for - when everyone is in a lot more objective frame of mind.

I am hearing that scoring plays are reviewed anyway.  That is only to determine whether the player actually scored, not whether there was a mistake made prior to the player getting anywhere near the endzone.

True that turnovers called as such on the field are also reviewed... not turnovers that are missed.

I really don't think the number of challenges is the problem, the problem is being able to challenge judgement calls such as PI and roughing the passer.

I like this for cutting down on the fishing expeditions some coaches have conducted (see Dickensen), dislike it for the fact that the refs have missed blatant calls (Manny's non catch we had to challenge). Overall would have prefered a better command centre and refs.

totally OK with this.  

All the challenges are a nuisance and I can live with the odd bad call, it''s sports, it's gonna happen and continued to happen even with all the challenges.  

Bombers haven't won a championship in the review era anyways. ..... so who cares.

It's too bad that when an obvious mistake is made on the field by an official and the entire stadium sees it on the replay that the Ref can't just go "whoops, we might have an error on the call.  give us a sec to check this out" and then ask the command centre to review, rather than just stand there looking at the error on the screen and hearing the entire stadium booing.  I know that there's no way the league would ever go for this but I've always wondered what must be going through an official's head when they can look up and see that they made a mistake.

1 hour ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I'd really like to know what the structure of the command center is, if it's just one guy

Ambrosie is showing initiative, no reason to believe that he won't address the problem in more detail in the off-season.

This.  I don't think they would have gotten the approval from the teams to drastically changes things mid-season.  This was an easy change & hopefully just a step one type of thing with more to come in the off-season.

4 minutes ago, bigg jay said:

This was an easy change & hopefully just a step one type of thing with more to come in the off-season

Your wish is your Command...Centre, and to that...

 

This is, in fact, the more appropriate decision..

Edited August 2, 20178 yr by Mr Dee

I don't see it as a knee jerk reaction .... I see a proactive commissioner and thats a very good thing ... proactive isn't perfection just progress that needs multiple revisions over time, each one an incremental improvement

hmm I don't know what to think, this might not help the bombers in the long run

LOL at Duron Carter.

4 minutes ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

LOL at Duron Carter.

https://twitter.com/DC_CHILLIN_8/status/892813080226112

#pluglife

1 hour ago, SPuDS said:

I can see the merits of both sides of the equation here but I think they should make an amendment that if you use your challenge and its correct, you keep it for a total of 2 per game.  if you challenge and lose, its gone.  

 

as I too can see scenarios unfolding where a catch/no catch is challenged and overturned... then next quarter you got a fumble/no fumble and now are at the mercy of the officials making the correct call if its not a scoring play..

 

Yup actually many sides to the equation but the question some of us are struggling with though is where is the sweet spot of bringing all these merits together? Looking for that balance so to speak.  It appears maybe the new commish is trying to get there. He's got a tough job, he has to appease at varying levels to the common fan, to the knowledgeable fan who knows the game inside out, to the players, to the coaches, to management, to the media outlets, to the referees and their bosses, to the corporations and the list goes on. Obviously compromises have to be made no matter where you sit here. One thing for sure though is the pendulum has to be moved in where it resides now when it comes to challenges. It just moved a bit with this decision. 

I like the new rule and that they didn't wait until the end of the season to make it.

I like that they will review the entire process in the off season and hopefully make it better.

I like that I won't have to wait for a review after most big plays.

I like that the Ipad warriors have less influence on the game.

I like that the C'Mon center has less influence on the game.

It's fine with me that HC's have to 'waste' their challenge on missed calls. That's what it was put in for in the first place.

I know the refs will get calls wrong. They always have. They always will, but lets face it, the C'Mon center get calls wrong too and they aren't doing it in real time with only one view. Most PI, RTP and illegal contact the don't get called aren't black and white anyway.

 

This is fantastic news. 

If Duron Carter disagrees with this change, well then why are we even discussing it?

3 hours ago, Mr Dee said:

NEWS HEADLINE:  Randy Gets It Right!

The pendulum is swinging back to saner proceedings. Put away your ipads everyone and focus on the game at hand. That's the message I get from this.

Well done!

Well.. Not for Jones. He uses his to catch up on the latest Delbert strips.

I'm good with it although some team is definitely gonna get hosed by having to use their challenge on some other blown call.

Ideally just get rid of stupid pass interference penalty challenges but honestly I would even go back to not being able to challenge penalties at all.  Give the coaches two challenges but only for actual football plays. 

2 hours ago, Gotmilt said:

I really don't think the number of challenges is the problem, the problem is being able to challenge judgement calls such as PI and roughing the passer.

As far as I'm concerned, the only part of RTP that should really be challengeable is the head shot, or hitting below the knees.  Anything else is timing and is a judgement call which as you say are the problem.

Just now, Sard said:

As far as I'm concerned, the only part of RTP that should really be challengeable is the head shot, or hitting below the knees.  Anything else is timing and is a judgement call which as you say are the problem.

I still feel like that's a judgement call, when slowed down you can call the penalty on every play. I feel like these calls should be made in real time and at game speed.