In the Argo’s @ Lions game on Sept 19, the ball was kicked away by BC late in the first quarter. The ball was short of the intended returner, Dorsey, and wound up hitting a team mate on the back of the leg. At that point, the ball was a live ball which the Lions recovered, but due to Arakgi of BC being within five yards of the unintended reciever, the play was ruled no yards. Toronto wound up with the ball. I personally think that no yards should not be called if the ball is unintentionally contacted by the recieving team ie: a player who has his back to the ball who is not the intended returner. The rule is to protect a returner from being clobbered.
cannot do that.. because it's too difficult to make that call every time. you're now making it a lot more complicated than what it needs to be.
No ... The rule is fine as it is. What happens if a cover guy throws his blocker into the returner from 2 yds away and the ball lands on the pile?
Was Arakgi clearly trying to get out of the way of the ball, or was he just standing there? I think that if it’s clear to the refs that you’re trying to get 5 yards away from the ball, they’re not supposed to call it. I also think the rule is fine as it is.
I see what youre saying...
It's unjust that a team should be penalized for something that is against their intention, viz. the ball hitting their opponent within the 5 yard grace area.
Then again, it is technically the kick/punt team's responsibility to look up in the air and see where the ball is landing.
Keep it as it is.
i think the rule should be kept as is as well.
I agree with you, I think they should change it for situations like that. Sometimes the ball will hit the ground and bounce toward a cover guy, why should he get penalized for a bounce?
I tend to agree as well. Not that this happens all that often so it's not that important. Back to the ball though as you say.
Just get a better punter and you won't have to worry about it.
Situational awareness is an important part of football. While it may have been an accidental or unintentional no yards, it was no yards none-the-less. If refs have to rule on simple intent (beyond the notion of intent to injure) it'd be too complicated.
Intent is too vague a word, but if the ball bounces toward a cover guy, and hits a player on the receiving team, it shouldn’t be no-yards, because the cover guy can’t move out of the way. No yards should only count when the ball is still in the air, and there is a player/returner ready to catch it.
Seems like this Aragki guy needs to brush up on his CFL rulebook knowledge LoL. Wasn't he the guy who illegally returned the dribble kick against sask? In that case he got away with one.
Re" The rule is to protect a returner from being clobbered." ---------- :thup: :thup: . If there is no attempt to tackle within the five Yards then there Not be a penalty, There are Flags thrown on every kick, Keep the refs out of the GAME!!! :roll:
The Intent of the Rule is to prevent injury not to have every silly bounce of the ball called its become automatic and it should not be !! :cowboy:
The refs get this call wrong more than anything else - it's awful. Bring in the fair catch. We have plenty of other rules that keep the CFL 'unique' or 'Canadian' we don't need this one tarnishing our game anymore.
No fairy catch , just the rule as it was intended,not when defenders are moving away from the returner,etc. because kick returns are a big part of canadian football :thup: , not so in the no fun league :thdn: