No yards punt rules

I remember it on converts as well. I’m thinking it might have been changed shortly after the two-point conversion was introduced. Don’t remember what year that was - possibly early '80s?

I remember it on converts as well. I'm thinking it might have been changed shortly after the two-point conversion was introduced. Don't remember what year that was - possibly early '80s?
The two point convert was introduced in the early 80's?

I thought it had been around for much longer than that. :?

Teams always had the choice of kicking a convert or running / passing the ball ionto the end zone. But it used to be a single point either way. And I seem to remember that they lined up at the one or two yard line back then. Then in 1976 (I finally found an unofficial reference to the year), they changed the rule to give two points on a run / pass convert, moving the line of scrimmage back to the five at the same time (that may have been later).

Originally, touchdowns were five points and converts were two points. But that's way before my time. (Is anybody on here old enough to actually remember this?)

In the 1953 Grey Cup the Cats beat the Bombers 12- 6. The Cats had two converted touchdowns and the Bombers had one. A touchdown was 5 points and the convert one point. I remember watching the game in black and white. I think I lived in Pleasantville. :lol:

Pat Lynch(the very old guy)

:lol:

If you remember that, I'm thinking your tag line is rather appropriate. And I thought I was old.

wow. You must have many stories to tell.
Did you happen to be at the 1972 Grey Cup game in Hamilton Pat?

I was just a few years old at the time, although vividly remember the cars parked on our lawn and every lawn for blocks and blocks, as well as the exuberance and outright frenzy of fans after the game.

Didn't know what all the fuss was about til years later.

My brother and I had seats in section 7 for the 1972 season but our Grey Cup tickets were in the weiner winner section of the endzone. Those were the days when the "corporate types" got the best seats and the real fans got the shaft. Needless to say, we stayed home to watch our Cats beat the Little General. Ian Sunter kicked the last second fieldgoal to win but Bob Krouse was the MVP in my mind. He called the defensive signals, blocked a punt and intercepted a pass. Sunter was a soccer player while Krouse was a football player.
My first Grey Cup game was in Toronto at the old CNE Stadium. I think it was 1962. The Bombers beat us by continually giving up safeties rather than punt into the wind. In those days, you retained possession of the ball after giving up the safety. Ploen and Van Pelt were the Bomber quarterbacks and Van Pelt was their punter.
I later attended the cup game in Montreal at the old Autostade on the St. Lawrence River.It was Sask vs. Ottawa, the Little General versus Russ Jackson and Ron Stewart. It was a cold, cold day my friends! The Green Riders couldn't stop Stewart and the Little General went down to defeat again.
Those are my only two Grey Cup games so far but I'm hoping to attend the first one in our new stadium. Having had season tickets since 1965, I think we should get pretty good seats this time.

Pat Lynch( a Cat fan since the age of eight)

My brother and I had seats in section 7 for the 1972 season but our Grey Cup tickets were in the weiner winner section of the endzone. Those were the days when the "corporate types" got the best seats and the real fans got the shaft.
Did the TiCat Season ticket holders back then not have first rights of refusal for any Grey Cup games played at IW/Civic Stadium?

I think you're mixing up your classic Grey Cups.
1962 was the Fog Bowl.
1965 was the Wind Bowl, where the Cats beat the Bombers by NOT giving up safeties when punting into the wind. The Bombers gave up 3 safeties, and lost by those 6 points.

I always get confused with the ______Bowl games..
When was the Mud Bowl then?

The Mud Bowl was 1952 I believe.

First Grey Cup I attended was in 1964 in Toronto with my Dad. BC beat the Ticats and got revenge for their loss to us the year before in Vancouver. The weather was cold and wet. So were my feelings at the loss.

I was at the 1972 game in Hamilton too. What a memory. My girlfriend (my wife since 1975) was with me and what a celebration it was when we won it at the end!

As for the converts, yes you could always run or pass or place kick for a single point, and let's not forget drop-kick (which Doug Flutie did in his final game for New England a few years ago... it hadn't been done in decades in either the NFL or CFL). I think the TD went from 5 points to 6 in about 1956. I thought the two point convert came to Canada a little later than 1976, but I certainly can't quibble on that. It was used in US college ball and the old AFL I believe. The NFL adopted it later when the AFL-NFL merger happened I think, and in the CFL later still. I can't say I'm a big fan of it, it contributed I believe to the decline of the rouge. The 25 yard deep end zone was shrunk when the dome in Vancouver opened and there wasn't room to accommodate it.

Now here's a question... when did they switch from horns to flags for penalties? Even I'm not old enough to remember that.

I was at the 1972 game in Hamilton too. What a memory. My girlfriend (my wife since 1975) was with me and what a celebration it was when we won it at the end!
very lucky indeed. Was it difficult to get tickets at the time? I believe they added 5,000+ seats for that game as well?
The 25 yard deep end zone was shrunk when the dome in Vancouver opened and there wasn't room to accommodate it.
Endzones retracted in 1983? I had thought this occurred in the late 60's or early 70's.

25 yard endzones would be intriguing to have again, although I was too young to recall such a field.

My Dad got the tickets, he managed to get six, four together for my parents and friends of theirs, and two for us separately, which was great. This was the game that showed my girlfriend what a nutbar Ticat fan I really was. Before that I would tell her, but she had her doubts that anyone could be so rabid about a football team.

No, the 25 yard end zone was always there when I was watching CFL ball as a kid and young man. Yes, it was very intriguing... the added real estate made the "red zone" offence more diverse. More punts (and missed FGs) were in play, fewer went out of the back of the zone, and in those days rouges were more of a factor in the potential outcome of a game, so you'd see more kicks run out or attempts made to run it out. The amazing punting duel between the Ticats and Argos in the 1961 playoffs probably wouldn't have happened without the deeper zone.

A few stadiums, Hamilton included, had tracks around them and so the corners of the deep end zones were cut off. Taylor Field was another I believe.

When they reduced the depth, I thought the field just looked all wrong. Still do, for that matter.

Modern Canadian football is a product of influences from both Canada and the United States on the original game of Rugby Union over the course of the 20th century to the present day.

The game will continue to change slowly to keep competitive integrity as player abilities, game strategy and game execution evolve. This in itself is part of the game.

We shouldn't be so hesitant to consider things from the NFL merely because they're from the NFL.

For instance, lets look at the 5 yard variety of the no-yards penalty. A ball kicked from scrimmage sails to a returner who allows it to bounce around. Kick team players offside to the kick almost always pounce on the returner the moment he touches the ball and take the 5 yard penalty in lieu of a big return. Years ago, they would circle the returner awkwardly until he picked up the ball.

Well how about we allow offside players to touch a kicked ball that's bounced instead? The ball would become dead as it does in American football and possession would be awarded to the return team at this point. It would encourage the return team to attack the ball and catch it in the air or risk a loss in field position. A kicked ball downed in the end zone would be a rouge.

The first question that comes to mind is probably how would officials tell the difference between an offside player downing the ball and an onside player or the kicker retrieving the ball?

Currently, if any kick team player touches the ball, flags will fly. After the play, the officials throwing the flag will confer with officials who monitored which players were onside and make the final ruling.

Well if we were to allow offside players to terminate the play in lieu of the 5 yard no-yards penalty, officials would allow the play to continue to its conclusion at which point they would confer with the officials responsible for determining who was onside at which point the play will be ruled as possession for either the kick team at the end of the play or the return team at the point the ball was recovered.

Any offside player lined up in an obviously offside position at the point of the kick should be coached and instructed to recover the bouncing kicked ball in a manor such that he is obviously not making an attempt to continue down field to prevent unnecessary injury should he otherwise be confused for an onside player.

The 15 yard variety of no yards would still exist for kicked balls caught in the air. No fair catch. Onside players would obviously still be able to recover and advance kicked balls regardless if they were airborne or bouncing about.

I'm not saying we need to change the 5 yards no yards. It does its job. But thinking of alternatives or testing them in pre-season doesn't hurt.

The dumbest-looking play in football is when a bunch of players on the punting team follow a rolling ball until it stops. I don't need to see that here.

@joedavtav - Fair question. I think a lot of CFL fan have certain rules that they consider to define the difference between our league and the one down south. The punt return / no yards rule set is probably one of the big ones of those. (The bigger field and twelfth player are probably the biggest other ones.) So many fans are resistant to change this particular rule. But you are right that considering the rule change shouldn't be taboo.

That said, I have some questions about what you're suggesting. What would happen if the returner is standing over the ball, and just as a coverage team player goes for the ball to down it, he also makes a move on the ball and is contacted by the coverage guy, either before or after touching the ball? Would there be a penalty? What if this caused a fumble? What if the ball bounced high and both the returner and a coverage player go for the ball, resulting in contact? Penalty?

I have the feeling that if the league allowed for downing the ball, they might also have to introduce the fair catch at the same time to avoid the situations above. And as there is an equivalent rule in rugby to the fair catch, maybe that's an acceptable rule change based on the history of the league. But personally, I wouldn't like it. And I suspect most CFL fans wouldn't either.

At the risk of taking this thread too far off-topic, I would say that the most defining rule difference is 3 downs vs. 4. Before I started following the CFL closely, I didn't even realize there were other rule differences besides that. Just listening to other people talk about the two games, that seemed to be the only one that people talked about.

Personally, I prefer the no-yards rule over the fair-catch rule from a "flow of the game" perspective, although no-yards is not perfect and can be annoying at times.

My bad. I had mentioned the 3-downs rule, but somehow I deleted it.

And I totally agree that, while the no yards rule is not perfect, it's much better than the fair catch rule. That's the one thing I really dislike about the American version of the game. I just find it boring. (And I'm sure that if a rugby player actually called "Mark" today, he'd be laughed off the team. So while the fair catch equivalent still exists there, it's not used anymore.)

tangledweb
re: your question whether or not season ticket holders had first right of refusal for tickets for the 72 Cup at IWS, it was sort of "yes and no". In those days the host stadium had to set aside a number of tickets for sale in the other cities of the league. The teams in the game were assigned so many and the other teams a lesser amount. So that would take care of a certain percentage. Not sure is that type of system is still in effect or not.

As season ticket holders, we received a coupon to redeem for tickets. The tickets were colour coded according to length of time you had held season tickets. So the senior holders had first shot in descending order. There was a cut off number (don't recall what it was) and anybody after that could line up at the Cat ticket office and hope for the best. The best chance for them was to get some of the unsold tickets returned from the other cities the night before the game.

Having only had season tickets for 1 year, we of course, were SOL. Like a miracle of the highest nature, we were watching the parade and my buddy's Dad approached us with two tickets on the 25 that he could not use. So we did see the game sitting right behind Pal Hanover (Mayor of the Morning on CHML) and he was a hoot.

I sit corrected. It was the 1959 Grey Cup in Toronto. The Cats lost to the Bombers. I must have been thinking of the 62 game on my home planet in a galaxy far, far away.( otherwise known as a senior's moment)

Pat Lynch (the aged one)