Time for a new "halo" zone in CFL play

Well I've had enough of excellent, aggressive defensive plays that end in a QB sack being negated by absurd "roughing the passer" penalties.
It seems that almost any tackle of a quarterback is liable to be called as RTP.
These ridiculous calls turn a loss of yards into a gain of 15 yards and an automatic first down. Talk about sustaining a drive artificially.

So, if the league wants to protect the quarterback to an absurd level, I propose a new "halo" zone similar to the five yard halo around a kick returner.

In this case, if a defender gets within two yards of a quarterback who has the ball, the play is blown dead and the next play scrimmages from where the ball was when the play ended.

I see this as the only way for defenders to defend while keeping the quarterback free from any contact at all, which seems to be what the league wants.

That is a pile of crap.. Pass rushers have all been trained to hit the qb.. It takes a slight alteration in mentality to get them in your grasp and pull them down.. That hit on Reilly in the fourth quarter is a good example.. The lineman went for a big hit and Reilly got his head in the way. The pass rusher could easily have gone for a softer, and in the end, more effective take down. The adrenaline gets going and these players have all been trained to hit, so there is not much hope for the current stock of players. Sadly, the turnover rate in the CFL is almost 50% now, so it should not take long for the next generation of pass rushers to make their way in and the culture will change.

Couldn’t disagree more. You have the ball, expect to get hit - hard.
This is football, not flag football.
You do something stupid to put yourself in a vulnerable position, expect it to hurt.
Since when is all the onus on the defender to adjust his approach and "grapple"the rusher/passer to the ground.
You hit them hard to force them to the ground or jar the ball loose.

NFL may be “No Fun League”.
Is the CFL “Careful Football League”?

No - they are leagues that want to survive and they now know that they will financially be put out of business by lawsuits related to concussions unless they put into effect these rules to penalize and hence eliminate any of these type of hits.

So, my suggestion of a two yard "halo" zone is valid then!
No concussions in this situation.
No contact at all in fact.
The new football.

Its like getting the head shots out of hockey. Some guys are having to adjust how they checked players almost their entire careers to be sure they are not in any way contacting a players head. It will take a while but eventually people will catch on and learn how to tackle the QB and 'defenceless' receivers without getting a penalty

The only way to not get a penalty is to not hit the QB. Seen way to many clean hits called RTP simply because the QB had released the ball 1/100th of a second before he was hit. This is not protecting the QB or preventing lawsuits, it's quite simply poor officiating and it's making for some unwatchable games.

I understand your concern TrueDoubleBlue but here's the way I look at it:

The RTP is a good rule and needs to stay but it needs to be improved. It is a good rule to protect the most vulnerable player on the field. How many other players have 1500 pounds of humanity bearing down them with one objective- sack him for a loss? Yes, this is contact football and there can be a price to pay but let's be perfectly candid.

When the fans see the opposing QB laid out it gets their adrenalin going. The fans become rabid! Oh we don't see it but I'd love to crawl into the heads of those fans. Sure they all say they hope the QB's is not hurt when medical attention is needed out on the field but let's admit it now once and for all…. how many fans are secretly hoping the QB has just been taken out of the game. Why? Because the next QB is not as good and that gives the hometown crowd more optimism.

Let's admit something else. That 1500 pounds of humanity bearing down on the QB will push the envelope as far as it can. If it's a clean take down…so be it. Fair is fair. If the QB gets injured that is the price one pays for being in that position. However, I've seen enough RTP calls made because it was evident that the guy hitting the QB was pushing the envelope. He was intending on making the QB pay the price and even hoping the QB doesn't get off the turf…just as long as it was a legal hit. In a number of cases it was not a legal hit. Could the guy have held up. Sure he could have. So why didn't he? The answer is obvious. Relax on the rule and you have your answer. Most of the guys rushing the QB will get away with whatever they are allowed to get away with. And that alone is reason enough to have the rule and enforce it strictly.

These players are not idiots. They know if the QB is taken out of the game it greatly enhances their chances of winning.

How can the rule be improved? Eliminate the RTP infraction when contact was clearly accidental such when the rusher was thrown off balance by the opposition and crashed into the QB or when the rusher was knocked into the QB by one of the QB's own players.

When I guy is bearing down on the QB and the QB releases the ball and it is question of whether or not the guy could have held up the tie should always go to the QB- even when it doesn't appear fair.

Like you I find it frustrating to see a 2nd and long end up as a RTP penalty, a 15 yard gain and a fresh set of downs but so far I've seen the call justified far more than the odd stinker of a call.

this thread and idea is dumb. may as well make it touch football, there would be more contact in that

The problem is not the odd stinker beaglehound, it's the many that absolutely reek of incompetence and plain inability to read the play. I agree, the rule is needed and when the defender goes in obviously late it should be called, but when a defender is blocked into the QB it's ludicrous to penalize him for something beyond his control. If the QB releases the ball and the defender can't stop before hitting the QB there is no penalty. Period. This is football, if you want to eliminate contact go play tennis.

The quality of officiating and their collective judgement has reached new lows this season and must change because between these frustrating calls, the phantom calls (PI in the Argo game) and the blatantly incorrect video review (punt team player called not onside at the the kick in Hamilton game when video clearly show him onside) officiating is doing more to ruin the CFL than anything else.

I await the arrival of FYB to defend these brain dead incompetents.

I don't usually defend brain dead incompetents, specially the ones that keep getting stupid penalties.

I’m calling you on it this time.

PROVE IT. Prove that player was offside on the punt. Give a valid reason for the PI call in the Argo game. You want to back the officials then do it. You love to throw your support behind them but never back it up with facts. You think those calls were correct then back it up for a change. If you can’t then stay out of the conversation because it just makes you look like you know nothing about football.

Back It Up!

I don't record games, so how can I prove it. I also don't say the refs get it right always, just mostly. Enough that they are not as bad as some of you like to say.

Anybody still have the halftime on tape to show dcmoses where Lapo illustrated how the control centre got that call right. The Ti-Cat player was NOT behind the punter at the moment of contact. He almost was as Lapo showed - but he wasn't.

It's the ball he has to be behind not the player. I have seen Lapo's show and according to the rules he was onside.

BTW, it was too a lateral

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_zg-J0q42M

In past years we could argue back and forth whether he was off side or not, but because of the challenge and a review by the command centre we get a second opinion and they ruled he was NOT onside. So why argue back forth? the ref got it right, it was settled he was not onside.
As for the hit on the QB - the tackler led with his helmet. He didn't have to put his head down he could have kept his head up, that's going to be called.

And ultimately it is a football game. A game where coaches, players and yes even officials all do make mistakes. The game never has been and never will be perfection and anybody who is expecting that perhaps should stick to perfectly programmed video games - not human ones.

By all means complain about calls - like fans have ALWAYS done, and by all means just like we want our teams to always be striving to improve keep pushing for better officiating. But missing the rest of a very decent football game over a call that MAY have been wrong by an inch or 2? Really? And I still think they got it right by looking at the picture I posted in the other thread. The kicker seems to be making contact with the ball near the 48.2 - 48.4 yard lines and the players head appears to be right at the 48 - tough to tell exactly because of the slight angle of the camera and he is a few yards away from the hash marks.

If I stopped watching games that I love to watch every time I thought an official made a mistake on a call by an inch or two I would have never in my life made it passed a couple innings of a baseball game, a quarter of a football game, a period of a hockey game a quarter of a basketball game.

The QB's just need more padding to absorb the hits better. If every QB was required to wear "Michelin Man" rubber padding over his entire body, for example, defenders would simply bounce off with the QB unharmed. While the suit might make passing more difficult, it would be equal for both teams. This added QB protection might just save the game of football. :expressionless:

Maybe flag football for the QB position only. (kidding) :stuck_out_tongue: