Poll on Coaches Challenges

Get rid of it, let the players play and the officials officiate. And not just the challenges, how about a thorough review of the whole 'no contact after 5 yards rule'?. If the contact is initiated by the receiver, away from the play, a coach can challenge, taking away a perfectly legal defensive knock-down? Or how about when the QB runs a keeper, gets stuffed and the coach challenges for an illegal contact when there was no intent to pass, and gets his 10 yards anyway?

How may times do we hear "old time" receivers and QBs marvel at how inflated their stats would have been under this rule? What did Dunigan say, 350 yards per game should be the new norm for any QB with this rule?

Some progress!!!

gary lawless ?@garylawless 28m28 minutes ago
Hearing @cfl rules committee met yesterday, came up with tweaks to challenge system. Looking to deter frivolous challenges. Board approved

gary lawless ?@garylawless 14m14 minutes ago
Waiting for details on changes to @cfl challenge system but would have to think deterrent involves unsuccessful challenges. No more flyers

No progress. An insulting spit in the face from the commissioner and board of governors. If this is their idea of change the game is in serious trouble.

You got 2 options folks; if you still think the system sucks and is killing the flow and entertainment value of the game change the channel and stop going to game, hit 'em in the pocket book, or, accept that this is the new norm and live with it. Hate to say it but the NFL was able to fix their disastrous video review system they implemented in the early 90s, however, 25 years later the CFL is too dumb, blind and stupid to learn from mistakes they made and have long since corrected.

Canadian football is dead.

Well it's a start will have to see what they come up with .

Disagree.

In the past coaches were free to use their first “free” challenge for fishing expeditions. Now they can’t, without losing a time-out. With only two time-outs per game, coaches are reluctant to waste them. You’ll see coaches only throw the flag if they are 99% sure they’ll win the challenge, and if they’re that sure then they should challenge.

As for Canadian football being dead, I couldn’t disagree more.

Not good enough. It's a tiny improvement but basically it's a band-aid on top of a band-aid on top of more band-aids.

The whole replay process needs to be stripped clean and rebuilt, streamlined and efficient, not the hodgepodge glom of incongruent patchwork rules that it is now.

Have to disagree Dave. A time-out is 90 seconds while a challenge is anywhere from 2-4 minutes. Name me a coach that won’t go fishing on a big play when his reward, at the very least, is a momentum killing 2-4 minute stoppage. It’s better than the time-out and he has a 50-50 shot of winning the way DPI and Illegal Contact are being interpreted at super slo-mo.

This won’t change a thing. This is a PR stunt to make it look like they are doing something. They need to eliminate it entirely and rebuild it from scratch. Play without for a season or two while they play with the system outside the game where they can experiment and change the rules from play to play if they like.

The current incarnation of video review and coaches challenges has sucked all the entertainment value out of the game.

I don't hate the reviews per say...I hate how they are implemented. Contact, for example, needs to impede or redirect a player...some of the stuff being called (especially via challenges) is brutal. As for PI....for me the biggest concern is the judgment of the command center. There is horrid consistency...never mind week to week or game to game...I mean the same game! that is just unacceptable. I get it...there is some judgement in the decision...there are many times they make a cal and I don't necessarily agree with it, but I can at least look and say "I get where they are coming from on this. but I disagree." The problem is when you have calls that leave you saying WTF...I mean times when you have even fans of the team it went against shaking their head for the most part. My other big issue is the glass houses the QBs now live in. I am all for protecting them....but you see them expected to stop within 1 step a lot now and there have even been a few times this season there was roughing when the defender was in the air before the ball was gone....heck you can even see some of them try to turtle their bodies to minimize the unavoidable contact and STILL get called...eye in the sky needs to catch that stuff and say no! I appreciate it happens fast out there but I expect much better.

I am of the opinion that you keep it, but that you can only challenge the targetted reciever. If the QB can identify the PI or Illegal contact that the refs have missed and pitches is out it becomes a play that wasn't allowed to happen, not a play that may or may not have happened. None of this after the play, coaches will full camera replay calling Illegal contact on a slight tap away from the play outside 5 yards, to a read the QB didn't even have a chance to make.

I also think the league should be reconsidering the 5 yard illegal contact rule. You can say players will get used to it all day long, it doesn't change that rookie DBs, who haven't played a CFL game, who don't have this rule either in the NCAA or CIS will be exploited by this rule by veteran recievers all the time.

I think you underestimate coaches’ reluctance to burn time-outs, but I guess we’ll agree to disagree on that. But if coaches use challenges as time-outs, as you say, last week the first challenge was like a third time-out. This week they can’t do that.

In the Rider game there were a couple of times you KNOW Jones wanted to throw the flag, but didn’t. At least once he would have won the challenge, according to the replay. If coaches keep their hankies in their pocket because of this, then this has worked.

You can’t expect a major overhaul of a system – or the complete elimination of it – mid-season. I’m surprised they did anything at all! If they just make illegal contact unchallengeable, then there will be no fishing expeditions.

as a coach if I would trade a 90 second time out for a 3 min challenge in a heart beat,
but the problem with this is that you may not be able to use the challenge for a time out at your convenience,
that is why a challenge should have the same time limit as a time out,
in my opinion the challenge rule should be,
#1 - all plays challengeable.
#2 - only 1 challenge per game.
#3 - time limit , same as a time out.
#4 - if unsuccessful, 10 yd delay of play penalty.
as a coach you would think long and hard if the risk is worth the gain.

Its missing my preferred option.

The only 5 challenges that should be permitted in my opion

1 - Roughing the passer
2 - PI or Illegal contact were the infraction denied or impeded an offensive play
3 - Contacting the Kicker challenge to determine if contact made first with the ball or kicker
4 - Spot of possession or TD - to review if the plane was broken or ball placement.
5 - Turnovers to determine possession and if the play was dead before turnover ( contact with ground etc ).

Challanges based on teams scanning the entire field of play for contact irregardless of if the contact was part of the play that was run, or impeded or denied an opportunity, should be completely removed from the game. The challenge was intended to make sure they got the call rights - not to find every technical wrong on the field. The whole challenge has gotten away on the CFL..... they need to get it back to making sure the call on a play is right and ensuring the QB's are protected ..... not the case of what it is now " dam we dropped the ball - quick scan the film to see if there was contact anywhere else on the field so we can challenge....

Every team does it - and its become a game within the game.