Ambrosie considers midseason Replay Changes

[url=] ... ment-72635[/url]

In the wake of Friday night’s replay controversy – the latest in an ongoing series – CFL commissioner Randy Ambrosie said he would consider making mid-season changes to the replay system.

“I’d be amenable to it but that’s step five and we should start at step one,? said Ambrosie, who was in Calgary on Saturday to take in the Stampeders game against the Ticats. “If we need to make a change, talk to the teams about that and let the teams be a driver of whether we should do it sooner rather than later.?

Ambrosie, who took over as commissioner on July 5 – said he plans to meet with his football operations staff in Toronto on Monday to begin discussions on what, if anything, needs to be done.

“It’s been three-and-a-half weeks so I’ve been drinking from a firehose on many fronts but I think this is an issue that I want to get involved in over the next few weeks and really dig into it and see if we have a problem, what is it and what can we do to improve it,? he said.

A former offensive lineman who played nine CFL seasons, Ambrosie says he would prefer less interruptions to the game.

“I don’t like when we slow the game down. I like when the game is cooking along,? he said. “I’d like the best we can to let the game flow and for the game’s to be fast and dynamic and exciting. I would temper that with you would never want a game decided by an egregious mistake that could have been corrected.?

Ambrosie said he’s aware of the social media reaction in the wake of Friday’s game and that some fans have said they are turning away from the CFL because of the state of officiating.

“I don’t want to lose a single fan for any reason,? Ambrosie said. “And I certainly don’t want to lose them over [replay].?

Was just reading this. Clear that he is seeing an issue there, and I LOVE how he is approaching it.

I might start by hiring competent replay officials then reducing the number of coaches challenges to one.

If that still doesn't work, then take away coaches ability to challenge for PI. PI is only to be called by on-field officials but can be overturned by replay. This should reduce the number of challenges and game interruptions while still getting calls correct.

Really? See if there is a problem? Hope I'm wrong but those are the words of another lame duck commish. Especially if the teams are driving the change. :roll:

When he says 'the teams' he's referring to the board as they would have to approve any changes same as any other commissioner.

He won't publiclly call out referee, replay officials, coaches etc....but yes, it's clearly something that needs to be addressed.

I'd like to see challenges curbed to one per game regardless and none on PI calls. Surely it can't be too difficult to fine better people in the replay booth....they just need to look at a screen and see what anyone else can.

What are you talking about? He is doing the right thing here, because these are the people that vote stuff in (including these rules). The commissioner does not make offseason rule changes the board does, and that is who he is going to to make his case and see if they agree changes are needed in their eyes. This is called fostering healthy working relationships 101…nothing builds relationships like “you guys Fd up with these rules and we need to change them now.” A leader empowers the people around them and pushes for change from the foundation…not by being trigger happy and making snap changes.

It seems pretty clear he will be pushing hard for change, so now it is a matter of if that will be in-season or post. Considering some of these were on the fence for staying or going I would think we will see some modest changes now and something deeper in the off season.

This is a great approach where you start at the source and end with the final product.

It is a big step up from Orridge who was clueless to anything wrong with the league.

Eliminate coaches challenges completely. They are useless since CC reviews all turnovers and scroring plays automatically.

Eliminate all plays from review except scoring plays, possession, in/out of bounds and time on the clock at the whistle.

BoGs know less about football than Rowdie Rod. :wink:

Seriously, was there not a "rules committee" that put this together or am I thinking of NHL? I stated....also as I stated that is the very people he is going to in efforts to drive change.

If that body of people do not want to change it then there is no point in him forcing it. This is very smart on his behalf. He is going to the bog (rules committee) and presenting concerns and wants to make changes. That committee was already close to yanking a few things in the off season and decided to give it this season and re-evaluate in the off season. He has now spoken to each of these people....he will do a good presentation to them as a whole and pitch change. Chances are not all the changes will go through...but there will be a token change or 2. After that he officially knows where each person stands and he can work individually on each person to try to sway them so that in 7 months when they meat for their official offseason rules committee meeting he can potentially have better support for wider change

This is leadership 101....this is exactly how he needs to do this, and his experience in being a leader is really shining

When I said "rules committee" I was think more in line with the NHL style which involves reps from the players and coaches. If this is at the feet of the BoG we can only hope that they know how to listen because these are the mental midgets who decided it was a good idea to video review discretionary calls. That decision has not only led to the bloated, momentum killing system we have know but can take a big part of the blame for the quality of those calls on the field.

Those video review changes were on the heels of nonstop complaining from a large sect of the fanbase. It was an action that was taken to address some of that, whether it work or not. I love the principle of those reviews, because when it catches something glaring that the refs simply missed it is a very nice thing, sadly, there is nothing much in place to prevent fishing for a call nor for one getting turned over that makes one go “come on, you have to let that go (mainly with illegal contact).” Seeing some obvious PI that has a huge impact getting reviewed or seeing a WR that was knocked down 12 yards down field that was missed…I like that end of it, and I believe that was the spirit of intent with the rules. It is not like they did this just because or something…they attempted correcting an issue and made a whole other one in doing so.

Orridge already had to change the challenge rules in the middle of the season last year because of blatant abuse of the 1st free challenge rule by some of the head coaches which had to be eliminated.
IMHO, it is the abuse of the Illegal Contact (away from the play) challenge rules by some of the HC's which should and hopefully lead to less opportunities to challenge.
I agree with many posters here, 2 challenges allowed, right or wrong, use them wisely.
If the HC's don't like it, the only have themselves to blame.

I completely agree with this. He is doing exactly what should be done. Unfortunately, in the current era, some want an authoritarian commissioner with unlimited power to rule by decree. That's not how the league works, and I don't believe it ever has. It is a league after all, not a kingdom.
I have every confidence in him to do an effective root cause analysis, gain consensus, and come up with a solution most can live with. I for one doubt that solution will include eliminating challenges completely, or, simplistically, knee-jerk replacing the control centre video refs with "better" control centre video refs.

Orridges change last year was lip service and insulting to fans as it did nothing to curb the misuse. It should have been reviewed in the off season but Orridge was simply a figure the BoG trotted out for PR so nothing was done because the powers that be don't see a problem.

This may very well end up being what happens, after some deep thought and all-party discussions as to what unintended consequences there could be.

Sometimes it seems as if the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Came out of the East semi between the Cats and Als from a few years ago. I agreed with the intent, however, I said then and stand by it now it is NEVER a good idea to review discretionary calls.Officials are human and when it comes to their discretion of the out come of a play it is better to live with the mistakes than dissect the game frame by frame which can seriously damage the relationship between the officials and player/league and effect the on field attitude of the official.

The questionable standards for PI and Illegal contact are a direct result of allowing video review of those calls.

I hope they kill the game within a game. Replay was meant to challenge the play on the field, and not to have a video team reviewing all contact away from the ball. Anything that happenes away from the ball should not be reviewable during a game.... send the video in if they feel it's worthy of supplimentry discipline.

Some teams have mastered the art of having receivers not part of the play run a bump route so they can fall back on that if the actual play fails. The rules permit it but it's killing the game and fans hate it. Time to ditch the game within the game and only permit replays on the play at the ball.

Still leaves 4 opportunities for the two coaches to go fishing and with automatic reviews of turnovers and scoring plays they have nothing else to save them for. That change would be the same as Orridges insult last season, no change.

Eliminate coaches challenges you eliminate half the problem.

Only review, challenge or CC initiated, scoring plays, in/out of bounds and change of possession and the above is no longer a problem.

Things that should not be reviewed;
Roughing The Passer
Illegal Contact

In the Argo game last week Ottawa challenged what play the Argos called. That's what this moronic interference has come to, they are challenging formations. Pull it back to the three I listed above or kill it completely and as disastrous as it has been I would be happy to go back to living with the officials mistakes and have NO video review. It's killing the game.

My solution - one challenge per team per game. You get a second if you're successful on the first. No thirds. No challenging for pass interference if it's not on the players involved in the pass play. No challenges on anything not involved in the primary play.