Blocking on Punt Returns

When I was a college student in Buffalo, New York in the late 1960's and early 1970's, I saw my first CFL games at that time. I found the game to be entertaining and fun to watch, but I've grown up on the NFL, so that to me is what I much prefer.
I remember at that time, and probably for several years after that time, there was no blocking allowed on punt returns, so the returner gained about five yards on the punt return and got tackled by about eight guys from the opposing team. This made CFL punt returns about as exciting a watching paint dry. When was the rule changed to allow blocking for the punt returner, and why did they not allow blocking for the punt returner in the first place?
All the CFL fans find the fair catch to be just awful on punts in the NFL, but it's just part of the game and no big deal, nothing to get your shorts in a fluster about. I could counter about awarding a single point for failure, specifically on a missed field goal that isn't returned out of the end zone. Even the NFL doesn't do that. It may not change the outcome of a CFL game, but ther's no doubt it is rewarding the kicking team for failure. The way I look at it, in the CFL it's three points for a successful field goal and one point for a missed field goal (that's not run back out of the end zone).

see bolded text. It’s about getting players to make returns whenever possible

I can't exactly remember when they changed the rule to allow blocking (above the waist only) but it was a positive step for the CFL. It makes the special teams more exciting...but now they need to add a rule penalizing teams that delibertly have their punters kick the ball out of bounds to prevent a runback.
I agree about the single point after a field goal but I would still like to see the ball still in play after a missed field goal as those returns can be exciting. (for the fans)

The only problem I have with that is how do you define "deliberate" in reference to punting the ball out of bounds. Sometimes the ball when hitting the turf takes a crazy bounce sideways or where you don't expect it to, so how do you penalize a team for that?

I like having the differences in the games, while I prefer the faster paced CFL game, I do like watching the NFL because of all the hype of American television and how they build up the players to be bigger than life. But my passion is the CFL, the Grey Cup, and our rules and history. But 3 or 4 down football is a great game, the hitting and intensity is second to none.

It is a big deal, IMO. The fair catch just kills the game. I don't understand, why a rule would exist in a game of running and tackling that says, "Stop! I don't wanna get tackled, so I won't run". I think the game should be played and not "stopped" by the rules. What is more exciting than a kick return whether it's in the CFL or NFL?

...I counter about awarding a single point for failure, specifically on a missed field goal that isn't returned out of the end zone.
Well why award 3 points for a field goal when a team concedes failure by acknowleding it can't make a first down or touchdown?

Furthermore I like to argue that the single point is not a reward for failure, but rather an award for an accomplishment.

No point is awarded if a field goal falls short.

No point is awarded if the field goal hits the upright.

No point is awarded if the field goal is blocked.

And, as you mentioned, no point is awarded if it is returned out of the endzone.

The accomplishment that is rewarded is this: A team earns field position such that it can kick the ball over the GOAL line, and by preventing the other team from returning it out of the end zone.

Furthermore, when a punt into the endzone is a strategic choice to earn that point, a team is not rewarded for failure, but rather for a scoring accomplishment that is described above.

What the rouge does is add more possibilites for a team to score thereby enhancing the excitement of the game.

as I have said before, I'd like to see the Single extended to include kicked balls that make contact with the uprights.

In general, with or without this rule, but better more with it, the Single makes the kicking game an even more important.

I'd Rather See The Play Go Live After The Ball Hits The Uprights. That Would Give The Game A Whole Other Aspect Of The Game, Especially On Short Kicks When The Whole Team Is Already Close To The Endzone.

In response to what Captain Kirk said, I thought the object of the game of football was to score touchdowns, and if unsuccessful at that, to try and score field goals. Because of the difficulty of advancing the ball down the entire field, the offensive team is awarded six points for advancing the ball over the opponents goal line either by run or pass. If the offensive team decides that they have too far to advance and they want to try a field goal from whatever point on the field of play, they have that right to place kick or drop kick the ball in the air over the crossbar and between the uprights for three points. the reason for only three points is because they didn't advance the ball as far as someone would have to when scoring a touchdown.
I have no problem with the rouge or single point on a kickoff or a punt play because if the kicker in either case kicks the ball through the uprights, does he get any points for doing so? NO of course not, and if the rules state that all kick must be returned or else a single point is awarded, I have no problem with that on a kickoff or a punt. On a field goal try, the object is to successfully kick the ball through the uprights and over the crossbar, so when that doesn't happen why should a point be awarded for that when no success took place. (I know the receiving team has to run it out of the end zone.)
Reading your argument, you say the single in this case is a reward for accomplishment for advancement of the ball and improvement of field position. In that case let's award points for each time the offensive team crosses mid-field with possession of the ball, another point award for advancing the ball to the red zone (20 yard line and in), and finally for every pass completed behind the line of scrimmage where the receiver has to run at least ten yards to gain a first down. Doing this just would be silly and doesn't make the game any better, so why does rewarding an unsuccessful field goal attempt with a point when the receiving team is forced to run it out of the end zone or concede a single point make sense?
Years ago in the NFL, when a field goal attempt was unsuccessful, the ball was placed at the 20 yard line and there was a change of possession. People complained about this all the time because you were giving an advantage to the team that attempted the unsuccessful field goal. The rule now reads that the ball will be given to other team at the spot of the kick, so if a a 50 yard field goal was attempted (ball on 40 yard line), the ball is place at the 40 yard line for the defending team to take over and go on offense. Therfore there is something at stake if you miss a field goal, and you don't get any reward if you do miss.
I do like the rouge or single point, on punts and kickoffs, but not on missed field goals, because it is an example of rewarding failure and something that I don't think should be done.

Hmmmmm ... interesting K-K

What's your logic to this? .... and would you give 4 points for a good FG that banks in off the uprights? Joke!

Cheers!

US guy from Philly

Welcome to the board .... to appreciate the 'single' on a missed FG requires that one get the concept of "failure" out of their mind

Think of it as ..... "0" for the missed FG .... but "1" for preventing the return

plus .... once you see the excitement of a missed FG return .... I have no doubt you will love the rule

Enjoy ....

Spike
You chose to look at it as rewarding failure but like I mentioned in another thread. In order for it to be considered a reward it must be given every time that the field goal is missed and that is not the case! Captain Kirk pointed out many cases were there is no point yet the kicking team failed in its attempt!

I chose to look at it as a point for success. They were successful in keeping the ball in the endzone!

To digress slightly. Do you like hockey?

Don't ya think that getting a point in the standings for an overtime LOSS is rewarding failure?

I think that is injury pron like the human coin toss was in the XFL.

no 4 point FGs, this isn't the NFLE or the NFL!!!

and see the Single Point thread, and Steve O thread on Canadianizing American football, for more.

Spike
How do you justify the safty?
It too, is neither a TD or Field goal!

the safety? it's its own rule, like a single for the O.

What I was getting at was the safty is 2 points for driving them back INTO the endzone.

The single is for not letting them get OUT of the endzone!

yeah, I get that.

The main objective of football is to get first downs. We all know that the collective objective is to score points, depending on how your first down campaign goes.

So instead of rewarding a team for "failure" aka "progressing far enough downfield that you can score a rouge," you'd like to reward a team for rouges on "kickoffs" aka "standard, non-scrimmage, happens-all-the-time plays that don't merit you scoring any points because it's always from the same place and has nothing to do with scrimmage plays."

Singles don't apply to Kickoffs (with or w/o my ball contact rule, which will not apply in this case), unless a player touches the ball.

Article 4: Single Point or Rouge
If the ball is kicked into the goal area by an opponent, a rouge is scored (1) when the ball becomes dead in possession of a team in its own goal area or (2) when the ball touches or crosses the deadline, or a side-line-in-goal, and touches the ground, a player, or some object beyond these lines.

AR Team A kicks to Team B. B1 attempting to catch the ball on Team B 3 yard line, fumbles it and is tackled with the ball in possession in the Team B goal area. Ruling - rouge (ball deemed to have been kicked into goal area by Team A).

AR Team A kicks to Team B. B1 catches the ball in the field of play while moving towards own goal line and, in the judgment of the official, the momentum carries B1 into own goal area. Ruling - possession deemed to have been gained in the goal area.

After a rouge the team scored against shall next put the ball into play by a scrimmage as first down at any point between the hash marks on its 35-yard line.

If the single point was scored as the result of an unsuccessful field goal attempt the team scored against may elect to scrimmage the ball at any point between the hash marks on its own 35 yard line or at the previous line of scrimmage.

Note: For the purposes of this Article a drop kick or place kick shall, without exception, be deemed to be a field goal attempt.

Note: If during a kickoff the kicked ball proceeds through the goal area and across the deadline or sideline in goal without being touched there shall be no score and the ball shall be awarded to the receiving team at any point between the hash marks on its own 25-yard line.

KK...

Let's talk about WHY the rule is that way.

Why is it?

Because a kickoff is not a play from scrimmage.
Because having rouges from kickoffs would be TOO MUCH scoring.
Because the CFL knew that teams would sign players that could kick 95 yards just to get the "freebie" point on every kickoff.