New CFL rules - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-14, 05:46 PM

http://www.cfl.ca/article/2011-cfl-r...anges-approved

These rules are generally good, and are a step in the right direction to improving the game. Would like to have seen more, but I'll take what I get. Glad to see rule changes in the CFL have been moving in a positive direction for the last few seasons.

instant replay: good to see this evolve to the next level, now I just wish that both three minute warnings and OT as subjected to league challenges so that teams can save up there two for other times. ATM, I believe, only the 2nd three minute warning and OT are subjected to this. Would like to see the CFL even this out.

Eliminating Blocking Below the Waist after a Completed Pass: a good step in the right direction. I wish that every type of play in the CFL had this restriction as well as for tackling as well. Football is a game of hits, but our players need to have some protection, especially from hits to the knees.

Punting Out of Bounds: I wasn't sure if this rule was still on the books or not, glad to see it is and getting a much needed upgrade. Now all the league needs to do if fix No Yards, and we are all set on punt plays pretty much.

Illegal Participation: Rather see the CFL take a page from the Rugby rule book on this, where players can go OB at will as long as the ball doesn't, with the exception of players trying to catch the ball in which they need to keep one foot in bounds to be successful. But I can live with it because its not Rugby, its Canadian Football.

CenturyBreak · 2011-04-14, 06:54 PM

What needs to be fixed with No Yards?

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-14, 07:11 PM

Quote:

What needs to be fixed with No Yards?

I'd like to see it just be a lit bit less messy.

Still have it be that the returner gets a 5 yard halo around him, and if it is broken when the ball is caught by him, the other team gets 15 yards (I believe thats the max allowed).

But if the ball is kicked, and w/e reason the returner is unable to get the ball, then any offside player can go for the ball if they chose (unless they have a guy on side trying to recover the ball for a first down) and likely they will let it roll to a stop, and touch it. They still get a 5 yard penalty for no yards from the spot they thouched the football and the returning team has possesion on the next play, but don't have to play hot potato with the ball and the returner until he or another player recovers the ball, and now they can't effect where the returning team starts w/o risk of injury to the returner (obviously if they tried to block the returner from getting to the ball, that would be interference or s/t)

That's my idea anyway.

Sometimes it hard to tell when no yards is broken of not (I have seen players go into the zone, but not get called cuz their covered I assume), and I guess like any penalty is a judgement call, but still it's a lit hard to tell sometimes.

JoeSoap · 2011-04-16, 07:12 AM

Quote:

What needs to be fixed with No Yards?

Once the ball hits the ground, No Yards should no longer apply. It would stop the silliness of seeing defenders dance as the ball is rolling on the ground.

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-16, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Once the ball hits the ground, No Yards should no longer apply. It would stop the silliness of seeing defenders dance as the ball is rolling on the ground.

but what would you do if it does? can any offside player now get the ball for a 1st? as you see above, I have the fix for that.

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-16, 02:54 PM

I also believe the Kick convert should be eliminated by making TDs worth 7 points, and have the option for a extra point conversion from the 5 yard line after a TD or just simply go to kickoff (in OT, you'd have to go for the extra point if necessary). It seems like the CFL is slowly going there but with the same 6 point TD and two point convert, which is fine, but I fear will reduce the scoring.

Singles should also count for balls that hit the goalposts in the end zone (as they would be counted as such as they are almost in there). However, to discourage kickers from kicking with the intent to hit the post w/o having it go OB in the end zone (not likely cuz why would u go for one when you can get 3, but possible), instead of having the team start at the 35 yard line as you do with any single, the next play would start at the 45 yard line instead, thereby discouraging kickers to get the point at the risk of giving the other team better field position. It doesn't make any sense to me that the ball is live on kicking plays but is dead once the ball hits the post.

I also believe the CFL should keep the cross over rule (and all other pro leagues should have it in some form), but to prevent a western team from winning the east championship of visa versa, the award would go to the team in the division with the best record (there should also be an award for the team with the best overall league record too imho) and the bye. Before the game to decide with team goes to the Grey Cup, there is a ceremony for the team to reconisie their achievement, and then afterwards, we have the game to decide who goes to the big dance (can even be on different days, Saturday the celebration, Sunday the game, or even the first week of the playoffs be the celebration). The first round of the playoffs would them be called the such and such division quad final, the such and such division semi final, and then the Grey Cup.

Jaymeister · 2011-04-18, 04:05 PM

Two things off the top of my head:

1. If a fumbled ball goes out of bounds, possession should go to the team that was last in possision, and not the team that simply touched it last before it went out of bounds. The current rule has never made any sense to me as the object seems to be to just knock the ball out of bounds rather than making a play. Possession has to be earned.

2. In a crossover situation, the relative records of the 2nd place teams should determine whether it's the 3rd or 4th place team that crosses over. In other words, let's say a Western team will cross over to the East. If the 2nd place team in the West has a better record than the 2nd place team in the east, they should earn the right to face the weaker opponent in the semi-final game, so they will get to play the 4th place team, and the 3rd place team should cross over to the East.

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-18, 05:45 PM

I like your idea for the fumble Jaymeister. Obviously, only kicking plays which are subject to the no yards should have singles, not any other play, so thats out. I would also like to add this from the UFL, cuz atm the ball is placed at the 5 yard line from the end zone from where the ball went OB (if this is for offence, defense, or both idk), which is as follows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...l_League_(2009)

Quote:

Fumbling out of the end zones - If the ball is fumbled forward into and out of the end zone, it is placed back at the spot of the fumble.

now I know people will be on me for using a rule from an American league for the CFL, but if there are rules there that are better for the game, why ignore them?

as for your cross over, I don't quite follow, can you use a diagram to make it earlier for me and others to understand?

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-18, 05:49 PM

There are also these rules from the UFL I think the CFL should look into as well.

Quote:

No Tuck Rule - In the NFL, if a passer brings his arm forward in a passing motion and then loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body, it is considered a forward pass (and thus an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground). This "tuck rule" is one of the most controversial rules in the NFL[26]; in the UFL, however, it is called a fumble.

IDK what the CFL's take is on this, but maybe this should be looked into.

Quote:

Blitzing/Rushing - On each play, the defense must use 4 down linemen who must be in a 3- or 4-point stance at the snap. No more than 6 defenders can rush the passer. Penalty for violating this rule is illegal defense (signaled as unsportsmanlike conduct), with a 15-yard penalty and a first down. This rule is meant to both protect the quarterback and encourage more scoring.[27]

Jaymeister · 2011-04-18, 07:17 PM

Here's an example of what I mean for the crossover rule. Imagine these standings:

1st West 12-6
2nd West 11-7
3rd West 10-8
4th West 7-11

1st East 14-4
2nd East 10-8
3rd East 5-13
4th East 3-15

In this scenario currently, since 4th West has a better record than 3rd East, they will cross over.

What I'm proposing is that since 2nd West has a better record than 2nd East, they should be considered a higher "seed" and therefore get to play a lower seeded team in the playoffs than what 2nd East gets to play. So in this scenario, 2nd West should play 4th West (the lesser of the potential opponents), and 3rd West can cross over to play 2nd East.

I hope this makes sense.

JoeSoap · 2011-04-18, 07:33 PM

Quote:

but what would you do if it does? can any offside player now get the ball for a 1st?

No, it would be like the NFL where the receiving player has to be given enough room to make the catch or pick up the ball.

Jaymeister · 2011-04-18, 08:31 PM

As long as onside players are eligible to pick up a punt from their own team, you have to have a no yards rule. Otherwise the kicking team can surround the ball (as they do in the NFL) and let their punter come in and fall on the ball, while the receiving team has no choice but to try to get in the scrum and grab the ball at the risk of muffing it. You can't have onside eligibilty without no-yards.

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-18, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Here's an example of what I mean for the crossover rule. Imagine these standings:

1st West 12-6
2nd West 11-7
3rd West 10-8
4th West 7-11

1st East 14-4
2nd East 10-8
3rd East 5-13
4th East 3-15

In this scenario currently, since 4th West has a better record than 3rd East, they will cross over.

What I'm proposing is that since 2nd West has a better record than 2nd East, they should be considered a higher "seed" and therefore get to play a lower seeded team in the playoffs than what 2nd East gets to play. So in this scenario, 2nd West should play 4th West (the lesser of the potential opponents), and 3rd West can cross over to play 2nd East.

I hope this makes sense.

Ah, I see not bad, but IMHO that would give the west division too much advantage, cuz really the 4th team is suppose to be eliminated but have a fair shot. Who would have home team advantage? 2nd West? IMHO it should still be 2nd East.

Kanga-Kucha · 2011-04-18, 08:44 PM

Quote:

No, it would be like the NFL where the receiving player has to be given enough room to make the catch or pick up the ball.

Quote:

As long as onside players are eligible to pick up a punt from their own team, you have to have a no yards rule. Otherwise the kicking team can surround the ball (as they do in the NFL) and let their punter come in and fall on the ball, while the receiving team has no choice but to try to get in the scrum and grab the ball at the risk of muffing it. You can't have onside eligibilty without no-yards.

but in the NFL, offside players can touch the ball to stop the play, u see what i'm saying? You guys are still describing CFL rules.

Udowish · 2011-04-27, 03:29 PM

I like the changes, and I like others really want to see the no yards dealt with a bit better.

2011-04-14, 05:46 PM	#1
Kanga-Kucha Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Atlanta, Georgia originally from Melbourne, Australia Posts: 302	New CFL rules http://www.cfl.ca/article/2011-cfl-r...anges-approved These rules are generally good, and are a step in the right direction to improving the game. Would like to have seen more, but I'll take what I get. Glad to see rule changes in the CFL have been moving in a positive direction for the last few seasons. instant replay: good to see this evolve to the next level, now I just wish that both three minute warnings and OT as subjected to league challenges so that teams can save up there two for other times. ATM, I believe, only the 2nd three minute warning and OT are subjected to this. Would like to see the CFL even this out. Eliminating Blocking Below the Waist after a Completed Pass: a good step in the right direction. I wish that every type of play in the CFL had this restriction as well as for tackling as well. Football is a game of hits, but our players need to have some protection, especially from hits to the knees. Punting Out of Bounds: I wasn't sure if this rule was still on the books or not, glad to see it is and getting a much needed upgrade. Now all the league needs to do if fix No Yards, and we are all set on punt plays pretty much. Illegal Participation: Rather see the CFL take a page from the Rugby rule book on this, where players can go OB at will as long as the ball doesn't, with the exception of players trying to catch the ball in which they need to keep one foot in bounds to be successful. But I can live with it because its not Rugby, its Canadian Football. Last edited by Kanga-Kucha; 2011-04-14 at 07:11 PM. Reason: correcting a typo

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2011-04-14, 06:54 PM	#2
CenturyBreak Join Date: May 2005 Location: Burlington, ON Posts: 420	What needs to be fixed with No Yards?

2011-04-16, 02:54 PM	#6
Kanga-Kucha Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Atlanta, Georgia originally from Melbourne, Australia Posts: 302	I also believe the Kick convert should be eliminated by making TDs worth 7 points, and have the option for a extra point conversion from the 5 yard line after a TD or just simply go to kickoff (in OT, you'd have to go for the extra point if necessary). It seems like the CFL is slowly going there but with the same 6 point TD and two point convert, which is fine, but I fear will reduce the scoring. Singles should also count for balls that hit the goalposts in the end zone (as they would be counted as such as they are almost in there). However, to discourage kickers from kicking with the intent to hit the post w/o having it go OB in the end zone (not likely cuz why would u go for one when you can get 3, but possible), instead of having the team start at the 35 yard line as you do with any single, the next play would start at the 45 yard line instead, thereby discouraging kickers to get the point at the risk of giving the other team better field position. It doesn't make any sense to me that the ball is live on kicking plays but is dead once the ball hits the post. I also believe the CFL should keep the cross over rule (and all other pro leagues should have it in some form), but to prevent a western team from winning the east championship of visa versa, the award would go to the team in the division with the best record (there should also be an award for the team with the best overall league record too imho) and the bye. Before the game to decide with team goes to the Grey Cup, there is a ceremony for the team to reconisie their achievement, and then afterwards, we have the game to decide who goes to the big dance (can even be on different days, Saturday the celebration, Sunday the game, or even the first week of the playoffs be the celebration). The first round of the playoffs would them be called the such and such division quad final, the such and such division semi final, and then the Grey Cup.

2011-04-18, 04:05 PM	#7
Jaymeister Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto, Rogers Cable, 8642HD, LG 55LW5600, Sony BDVE980W Posts: 376	Two things off the top of my head: 1. If a fumbled ball goes out of bounds, possession should go to the team that was last in possision, and not the team that simply touched it last before it went out of bounds. The current rule has never made any sense to me as the object seems to be to just knock the ball out of bounds rather than making a play. Possession has to be earned. 2. In a crossover situation, the relative records of the 2nd place teams should determine whether it's the 3rd or 4th place team that crosses over. In other words, let's say a Western team will cross over to the East. If the 2nd place team in the West has a better record than the 2nd place team in the east, they should earn the right to face the weaker opponent in the semi-final game, so they will get to play the 4th place team, and the 3rd place team should cross over to the East.

2011-04-18, 07:17 PM	#10
Jaymeister Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto, Rogers Cable, 8642HD, LG 55LW5600, Sony BDVE980W Posts: 376	Here's an example of what I mean for the crossover rule. Imagine these standings: 1st West 12-6 2nd West 11-7 3rd West 10-8 4th West 7-11 1st East 14-4 2nd East 10-8 3rd East 5-13 4th East 3-15 In this scenario currently, since 4th West has a better record than 3rd East, they will cross over. What I'm proposing is that since 2nd West has a better record than 2nd East, they should be considered a higher "seed" and therefore get to play a lower seeded team in the playoffs than what 2nd East gets to play. So in this scenario, 2nd West should play 4th West (the lesser of the potential opponents), and 3rd West can cross over to play 2nd East. I hope this makes sense.

2011-04-18, 08:31 PM	#12
Jaymeister Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto, Rogers Cable, 8642HD, LG 55LW5600, Sony BDVE980W Posts: 376	As long as onside players are eligible to pick up a punt from their own team, you have to have a no yards rule. Otherwise the kicking team can surround the ball (as they do in the NFL) and let their punter come in and fall on the ball, while the receiving team has no choice but to try to get in the scrum and grab the ball at the risk of muffing it. You can't have onside eligibilty without no-yards.

2011-04-27, 03:29 PM	#15
Udowish Join Date: May 2008 Location: Calgary: Samsung UND556300 LED Tv, DCT 3400, Gateway + 2 portals,shaw PVR expander; Toshiba 42ZV655 Posts: 129	I like the changes, and I like others really want to see the no yards dealt with a bit better.