Penalty Parade

CFL Talk
#1

Glen Johnson (CFL Director of Officiating) was on the radio this morning discussing the need to reduce the number of flags. The Edmonton/Winnipeg saw a few totally unnecesary flags, at least two roughing the passer penalties for touching the foot (one for each team so it evened out at least) that bordered on rediculous. Then there was the absolutely rediculous 'taunting' penalty when Willis tossed the ball into the stands after his touchdown. It seems only offensive players are allowed to give the ball to fans and the explaination was that Willis had tossed a Winnipeg ball when he is only allowed to toss an Edmonton ball.

Is it just me or is this just absolute silliness. The number of penalties is bad enough without coming up with rediculous ones.

#2

That taunting penalty was utter non-sense… if winnipegs feelings were really hurt, he coulda just bought them a new football.

As for “roughing the passer” QB’s get to many special considerations as is, then it’s not inforced when it should be e.g. Collaros hit in HAM @ EDM.

Last week (sorry, can’t remember the game) I saw a defender flagged for “roughing the passer” or unnecessary roughness because the QB was running down field, and as the Defender went to make his tackle the QB slid, knowing he was about to be contacted and drew the flag. such garbage. If you cross the line of scrimmage you’re no longer a “passer” you’re a “ball carrier” and people should be allowed to tackle you as such.

#3

I suppose this is related to the new rule this year allowing teams to supply their own game balls for offence. I can see the reasoning here, with each team having a limited number of balls, the other team isn't allowed to throw one into the stands.

Not sure this was communicated to the players or not, but they know now. I don't think this is like Stala getting an Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty a few years ago when he kicked the ball into the stands the week after the officials had been instructed to call it whenever a player kicked the ball away, but weren't told that it didn't apply to TD celebrations. This one kind of makes sense.

Also, I wonder if offensive players are going to stop throwing balls into the stands for this same reason. It could be that a particular ball is the QB's favourite from the bunch, and he might not want his receivers throwing it away.

#4

Sorry Cats fan but this one makes no sense whatsoever. Why are the teams supplying there own balls? Shouldn't the league be supplying the game balls? Aren't all of the balls to a set standard? Since teams are supplying their own balls, can they adjust the pressure or the gas used to fill the balls. How about having helium filled balls for the kicking team. Since all balls are created equal, wouldn't it be a simple as making Edmonton give Winnipeg one of their balls? What happens if a team runs out of balls, do they forfeit the game?

The CFL really needs to rethink this rule, it truly is stupid.

#5

+1 :thup:

When did this practice start?
Standardized league-supplied CFL footballs for CFL games.
How can there be any other fair option?

If there isn't enough reason to not throw an interception or fumble the ball, this new practice adds another. "Mommy, he took my ball!!"

#6

I have no idea why they implemented this rule. I shook my head when I read about it. But as far as I know, the balls still need to meet the league regulations for size, pressure, etc. so I think that eliminates the kind of tampering you're mentioning. I think it was more about getting a ball with the "right feel". Not exactly sure what that means. Could even be a superstition thing, for all I know.

But given that the rule is in place, the penalty does make some sense.

#7

it's not a stupid rule. they did it so that the QB's can use the balls that they practice and use daily.

it makes perfect sense!

#8

Since all game balls have to be new balls and all balls must be the standard Wilson balls, how does that make sense. They are not the balls used in practice since they have to be new.

Based on the Edmonton/Winnipeg game, I don't think there was any benefit for either Qb. using their own balls and Winnipeg should have been happy that Willis through that one away.

#9

It is a black and white rule...Each O gets 6 balls.
And no...not all footballs are created equally. Beyond that you can adjust the pressure in them. Some QBs will now overinflated them while some will reduce them a bit.
Go get a football and adjust the pressure up and down a little and you will see it makes a huge difference.

I personally wish they didn't do it, but I respect why they did it, and thus agree with the penalty.

#10

The balls can only be inflated within the prescribed psi range 12.5 psi - 13.5 psi. If it were an advantage to inflate them all to 13.5 psi, they all would inflate them to 13.5 psi. Dumb rule.

#11

Nope, not just you
It's way beyond silly. My first reaction when I see a great play should be WOW! but instead its "IS THERE A DAMN FLAG???!!

#12

I'm assuming the teams asked for this rule change based on input from their quarterbacks.

But balls don't have to be new, just that they have to be like new.

Other approved changes to promote scoring and improve the flow of the game:
  • Allowing quarterbacks for each team to use their own team supplied Wilson footballs, provided they have met the "new ball" quality standard established by the league.

http://cfl.ca/article/board-of-governors-approve-all-rule-changes

Every quarterback is different with different preferences. Some like their balls, uh, more inflated than others. I'm guessing here, but I would sat that a lesser inflated ball would be easier to grip, but wouldn't give as tight a spiral as a more inflated ball. Maybe some quarterbacks prefer the laces to be slightly looser than others. And I'm sure there are ways to adjust the finish on the balls while still meeting the league's "'new ball' standard quality" criteria.

All footballs may look alike until you start throwing one for a living.

It used to hold that the home team would be responsible for supplying the balls used on offence and for kicking, which are different.

The process undertaken by Lions equipment manager Ken (Kato) Kasuya and assistant Andrew Dubiellak to scuff up two dozen balls with a warm cloth takes at least four hours per week.

"You'd really notice the difference playing in Miami," said former Dolphins pivot John Beck, now a Lion. "In the heat the dimples would stay there. In the cold they harden and flatten."

Anthony Calvillo ... would insist the footballs he would use for Montreal Alouettes home games came right out of the box and were not scuffed.


http://www.theprovince.com/sports/rule+changes+apply+balls/9980544/story.html

Apparently, balls used for games prior to this year weren't exactly new, but had been prepared by the home teams to their quarterbacks' and kickers' preference. Now the visiting teams get to prepare balls for their quarterbacks and kickers as well. I guess that's fair.

#13

I think the idea/reasoning was that individual QBs might prefer a slightly different inflation. It probably can't go much more than 13.5 without stressing the seams/causing bulges. It is about an 7.5% variance each way from 13 psi; a 15% potential difference would likely be noticeable.

#14

Based on the second article I posted, it's more than just the inflation. It's also the texture of the ball, bringing up or softening the bumps - or, in the case of Calvillo, leaving it the heck alone.

I can hear Rod Black already, comparing it to car racing teams switching tires depending on track conditions and drivers' styles. "The field's a bit wet out there. Let's see which team has adjusted better tonight, switching from their dry-field slicks to their rain balls." And then bringing up the Richie Williams connection to NASCAR. Sigh.

#15

Whichever team supplies the balls, I don't like the idea of penalizing someone for throwing it into the stands. When the league supplied the balls, they used to fine these players, but assess no penalty. Why can't they fine defensive players who do that, with the fine going to the offensive team to recover the cost of the ball?

What happens when a player gets his first interception or fumble recovery, and wants to keep the ball?

Assessing an on-field penalty for throwing it into the stands is stupid. But if it's considered "taunting" and therefore a 10-yard penalty, then it MUST be a penalty for EVERYONE who does it, whether they are on offense or defense, whether it's their team's ball or not.

#16

Because the players wanted it. They wanted to play with the balls that were worked in during practice.

#17

YAAA
they wanted to play with their own darned balls

:cowboy:

eventually....it had to be said