End the Rouge for Missed Field Goals

As a fan of the CFL for 40 years, I have come to the conclusion that we should end the practice of awarding a rouge for missed field goals.

I agree with the league's detractors that it "rewards failure".

Although it is an historical part of Canadian football, I think it is time it was retired to the pages of history.

Last night's Argos vs Riders game was a case in point. And I'm speaking as an Argo fan.

There is much about this league I love, and I honestly believe we can retire this rule without detracting from the uniqueness that it offers.

as many times it has been said before, the only thing they should change is make the rouge dependable on if the ball was playable, as opposed to simply sailing throught the endzone.

So if the ball is not "playable" and sails through the end zone, no rouge? Then we run into the messy determination of "playable". I'd rather not leave that one to the refs.

if it hits the ground before going out, its playable. No mess at all. Also, if it hits a receiving player, then it is playable. No mess here either. very very simple.

I don't like it. In such a scenario, if the missed FG hits the ground and rolls out, the rouge is still awarded. Or if the missed FG hits a player and goes out, the rouge is still awarded.

The only points that should be awarded on a missed FG is a single when the ball is caught by the receiving team and downed by taking a knee.

Agreed! I dislike that a game, even a Grey Cup can be won on a missed field goal. It's rediculous!

And just to clarify, The only points that should be awarded on a missed FG is a single when the ball is caught by the receiving team and downed by taking a knee IN THE ENDZONE.

The only points that should be awarded on a missed FG is a single when the ball is caught by the receiving team and downed by taking a knee IN THE ENDZONE. Oh yes, or by running out of the endzone...

Well well well its been a while since we agree on something. I would say if the ball bounces out of the endzone no rouge is awarded either. Playable means the ball stays in the field of play, and the returner chooses to take a knee.

Yes, if the ball stays in the end zone, it is playable.

Are you suggesting the same for punts? And if someone tries a dropkick, would that be assessed like a punt or a FG attempt?

I don't like touchbacks. Boring. If one team kicks the ball into the endzone, give the other team some incentive to bring it out if they can. If the kicker can put it all the way through our larger-than-NFL endzone, good for him.

one of the most exciting finishes was the Als vs Argos in 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5BFaykcxGg

Love the rouge...love it!

The rouge goes beyond "rewarding failure".

It serves as a strategic point. The Team in possession must decide if it's safe to kick a field goal from where they are on the field, taking the single point into consideration on the decision based on distance, and the incentive of the defending team to carry it out of the end zone rather than just taking a knee.

Even more so, the defending team must decide whether they should give up a point or take the risk of running it out of the end zone, possibly giving up field position rather than the single point that may come back to haunt them. It also gives incentive for the defending team to carry it out of the end zone, resulting in a more exciting play than a dead ball, and thus a more exciting game.

Ball cross the line you get a points, you can either kick the ball, pass the ball or run the ball. There is NO rewarding failure. the only change, i would agree too, is the ball must land in the the endzone to get the point on a miss FG

I say leave things the way they are. We don't need a lot of over time games because people complain about that format. The CFL is a unique game and I want it to stay that way, not Americanize it.

Yup...if no point you may as well move the posts to the back of the endzone...no point in them being on the goal line then. But hey, that is a pretty big enzone for a convert...let's shorten it then, because 1/2 the reason it is so big is because you need to play around the posts. One step closer to the American version of the game. I'm not even originally Canadian, and I can appreciate that which makes the CFL unique. Embrace that which is unique...don't ruin it.

I've never seen a missed field goal be awarded a rouge. If, for example, the kicker comes up 5 yards short on his attempted FG, no rouge.

There is, of course, a rouge scored by successfully kicking the ball beyond the goal line and through the endzone or beyond the goal line and successfully stopping the the defending team from returning the ball back across their goal line. Thus, a goal is scored for successfully putting the ball beyond the goal line, just like in most other sports (except in the NFL, with its quirky rules). A field goal is scored, as we all know, for putting the ball beyond the goal line and through the uprights, and a touchdown is scored for downing the ball beyond the goal line. They key commonality is that the goal line is inviolate.

If we got rid of the rouge, we'd be rewarding the failure of the defending team to actually defend their goal line. So, let's not reward failure; keep the rouge.

I would agree. I very much dislike the rouge. It DOES reward failure.
It's an oddball rule and a fluke way to score.
Personally, I think it detracts from the CFL game.

It's important to remember that a rouge is not awarded for a missed field goal:

In Canadian football any kick that goes into the end zone is a live ball, except for a successful field goal or if the goalposts are hit while the ball is in flight. If the player receiving the kick fails to return it out of the end zone, or (except on a kickoff) if the ball was kicked through the end zone, then the kicking team scores a single point (rouge).

Dave has nailed it. High Five, or anyone else who doesn't truly understand Canadian football (though you may think you do), please try to refute what he has said. (Good luck)