Video Review

Is there a really good reason why penalties cannot be reviewed? Did we just arbitrarily follow what the NFL does? To me it makes sense to be able to challenge penalties. The video review was set up to get more acurate officiating, with fewer screw-ups, like whether or not a ball is actually caught. But an incorrect penalty can potentially change the outcome of a game as well. I don't believe it would make the game any longer - we could have the same number of challenges, just expand the criteria. You wouldn't have a coach challenging every holding call, etc. But if there was a critical point in a game where a bogus interference call cost a team a touchdown, I think it should be challengable.

I think this would take a lot of pressure off Higgins too, as he wouldn't have to defend as many terrible calls the following week :slight_smile:

Penalties can't be reviewed, but black and white calls like 'no-yards' can be overturned or applied if caught while looking after a reviewable item like whether or not a return team player touched a bouncing ball.

Good point, but still there is no way of challenging a penalty. And I don’t know why! I understand certain penalties are subjective, and would be difficult to overturn. But many are not, like the no-yards example you gave. But you are unable to challenge it, unless there happens to be another challenge taking place at the same time. Even then it may not be caught, since they are reviewing something else and may not notice. The coach can’t say “and by the way, while you’re under the hood, have a look at the no yards?.

Agreed. As long as the number of available challenges didn't go up, I would support this. My guess is that the reason it currently isn't allowed (in addition to following the NFL) is that it might slow down the game and put the refs further under the microscope.

Given there has to be conclusive evidence to overturn a call, and the relevant portion of the play has to be caught on film, I can't see teams throwing away challenges on frivolous or subjective calls, or penalties away from the play. Prime examples that come to mind are a couple of games this year with face-masking infractions that weren't called because the refs didn't see them. This would be a pretty safe challenge, I think, on a penalty that really should have been called in the first place. I'm also completely infuriated by the number of times offside is not called. If a receiver is over the line of scrimage at the snap and goes on to make a big catch, that should come back but so many times this year no penalty was called. Something like pass interference or holding would be risky for a team to challenge unless the infraction was blatent (i.e. player is tackled, jersey stretched way out, etc.) since there needs to be conclusive evidence to overturn a call.

Overall, I think this is a good idea worth exploring.

The problem is, where do you draw the line. If you are going to allow for calls to be reviewed, is the next step to allow for reviewing non-calls.

I thinks the review policy with regard to what is reviewable is fine as it stands.

I'm going to agree with cfleakfan,where do you draw the line.If the coach questions a call,why even have a ref.Lets just get rid of the refs,add more cameras so some guy in TO can call the pen's.

The only thing I would like to changed,if a team calls for a replay and they are correct,they shouldnt lose that challange at all.I know if they get 2 overturned they get another one.But to me why should they lose one if they get the right call made?

And I think the the CFL's is better at the replay thing then the NFL,letting the guys in TO make the call instead of the refs,is one of the smartest things the CFL has in awhile IMHO.Having one person look at the challenge is better then the ref doing it from the sidelines,right or wrong I think its more consistent.

Also do we want 4 hour games?

You guys aren't thinking this through. Of course we still need refs... teams only get two challenges, but there's a hundred plays a game :roll:

And no the games will not be 4 hours, god I get tired of hearing this argument, again only two challenges each, the exact same length of game.....

There are too many times when camera angles don’t give the proper prospective on a penalty or don’t have all angles so I would say no to reviewing penalties.

I think it makes sense for certain penalties to be reviewed (is Illegal forward pass beyond the line of scrimmage reviewable in CFL? It is in the NFL). As was already said though, it comes down to how far you want it to go.