Challenge Flags

Can someone please explain something to me about the "three" challenges we apparently tried to use?

  1. Our first challenge was on a play inside the three-minute mark of the first half. Isn't it an "officials" challenge inside three minutes before half time and in the 4th quarter? I know Charlie threw the flag but usually they say "You cannot challange a play inside three minutes...blah blah blah." (At which time the officials booth most likely would've buzzed the head official and they wouldv've reviewed it themselves.) Why did they grant us that challenge inside three minutes?

  2. We won our second challenge. What is the rule when you win a challenge? I thought you either get another challenge or don't lose one for getting it right.

Can someone shed some light on this for me?

Taffe challenged that first one, it wasnt a booth challenge.

From the CFL website


Instant Replay is a system designed to assist Officials in evaluating play situations on the field where judgment may be in question due to:

* their positioning and limited view of the action;
* the speed of the action, which makes a split second decision difficult;
* an error in judgment.

All Instant Replay Reviews will be operated on a Challenge system for 2006, except for the last 3 minutes of the second half and in overtime.

The system operates with the "Replay Technician" and the “Replay Official? recording the television video feed onto a VTR machine located in the League Supervisor booth at the press box level in each stadium. This recorded tape will be used for Instant Replay Review.

To initiate an Instant Replay Review, the "Head Coach" will execute the challenge prior to the legal snap of the ball on the next play, by stepping on the field, getting the attention of the nearest official, and throwing a marker.

Each team will have the ability to execute 2 challenges per game prior to the last 3 minutes of the second half.

The first challenge will have no impact on team time outs, regardless of the outcome of the challenge.

A second challenge, if unsuccessful, will result in the loss of a team time out,either first or second half.

If a team has used their team time out in the first half, and their second challenge occurs in the first half and is unsuccessful, then the team will forfeit their second half team time out.

In order to execute the second challenge in the second half, a team must have a team time out remaining.

If both first half and second half team time outs have been used prior to any challenges, a team would continue to have the opportunity for one challenge.

In the last 3 minutes of the second half, and in overtime, all Instant Replay Reviews will be initiated by the Replay Official in the League Supervisor’s booth.

All Instant Replay Reviews will be conducted by the Referee at field level, on a field level monitor.

An officiating decision made on the field will be reversed only when the Referee has indisputable visual evidence that the call should be changed.

Once an official has whistled a play dead, Team B (the defence) cannot gain possession of the ball, unless otherwise specified in this manual.

The Referee will have sole responsibility in evaluating team challenges and deciding, based on this manual, whether or not a play is reviewable.

The sad part of the CFL challenge system is that there are not enough cameras that provide conclusive evidence. As a result the call made on the field is the one most likely to be made. They need cameras on the sidelines to judge catches along the sidelines.

Dude, I know Charlie threw the flag. My point is this:

"All Instant Replay Reviews will be operated on a Challenge system for 2006, except for the last 3 minutes of the second half and in overtime." (Thanks Dummymaker.)

So why did they grant us a challenge then in this case? They should've reviewed it as an "officials" challenge.

They screwed up.....plain and simple.

because it was in the first half, not the second half.

Because it was the end of the first half that occured in....

You're missing the point! I agree with you, but that's not what I'm talking about.

We were charged with a challenge inside three minutes of the 2nd quarter. Yes Charlie thew the flag, but they shouldn't have granted it. If they reviewed the play at that time, it was an "officials" challenge...not ours.

you're not reading the rule! The booth only challenges plays at the end of the SECOND HALF and overtime.

Charlies first challenge was in the FIRST HALF.

So it's only in the 4th quarter then?

Since when?

New Redskins head coach Jim Zorn has a novel approach to handling the seemingly simple arithmetic of counting one's available challenges. In the Hall of Fame Game, he handed his challenge flag to another assistant to "hide" from him after his number -- two -- had been exhausted.

Taaffe? Let's give the opponent first down inside the five! PREPOSTEROUS AND INEXCUSABLE...particularly in a must-win game. Period.

Oski Wee Wee,

Ah okay...."second half" was throwing me off.

That's what I figured based on the way it was called, but has it always been that way? I thought it was always an officials review inside three minutes before half an in the 4th quarter? (Did they change this?)

Taffe has been throwing flags on decisions that could not be challenged all season. I would even suspect he was warned that he would be penalised if he continued. In addition Toronto declared its formation on that play and really he could have taken advantage of that to make a change his play.

It was a good decision by the official, long time coming IMO.

I think in the NFL the booth takes over inside 2 minutes at both halves. And teams are charged a timeout for every lost challenge.

Yeah....I think you're right. Maybe that's where I'm getting it mixed up.

Just to add, the play that Taaffe threw the flag on was not a challengable play, you cannot challenge the spot of the ball on 1st or 2nd down.

Having said that, Dorsey stepped out and the officials blew it.

Yes...they did. He was clearly out at the 5 and that might've made a huge difference.

HUGE difference. They are 2nd down from the 5 rather than the 1.

Not that it excuses Charlie for not knowing (again) the rules, but doesn't it seem a strange rule that only allows you to challenge the referee's call twice per game? A referee could make 5 obviously bad calls that would be supported by replay but only 2 of them can be challenged. I understand that the game would be even longer than the game tonight but maybe calls that are overturned shouldn't count. It's not the coaches fault that the referee is making bad calls.

This is the CFL. I wouldn't use the word "could" is very obvious by now that there are well over 5 blown calls a game. Look at the game in point.

(I'm not saying the Cats lost because of officiating....I'm just saying I'm sick of the officiating in this league.)