Why can't you overturn a penalty?

Actually, let me start by saying that I have nothing against the refs, and I applaud them for the great effort and the countless good, close calls they've been able to make. But regardless of how many good calls are made, hell freezes over when a bad one is made, and after the Montreal/Winnipeg game, it's understandable why!

The refs on the field are part of the game, just as much as any of the players are. We here it over and over from Tom Higgins that they're competing, too, amongst each other for the top spot. I'm fairly sure we all saw the PI call at the end of the Montreal/Winnipeg game, and how it was complete bogus, and gave Winnipeg one last chance at winning the game. Why can't Command Centre not review this sort of thing? Penalties can have monumental effects on a game. Whether they decide a game or not, I'll leave at your own discretion. :stuck_out_tongue:

I think allowing the Command Centre to hand over possession to a team off a challenge was a great step forward in the use of the Command Centre by the league. I think the next step forward should be deciding whether penalties were good or not. Not every single penalty on every single play, or anything like that, but at least upon the request of a challenge or in the final 3 minutes. I can only see good things coming out it.

Penalties are generally subjective calls.
I think it's a very slippery slope if you allow penalties to be overturned.
Mind you sometimes, that means having to put up with absurd calls such as we saw on Friday night.
IMO replay should only be used for objective aspects of the game that leave no room for personal interpretation. A catch is a catch, a fumble is a fumble, etc.

What one ref deems a penalty is totally different from what another deems a penalty. Especially in the CFL.

You make some valid points. Especially with PI, the subjectivity of the call comes into play. With that in mind, if a coach elected to challenge a penalty, he would have to take into consideration the risks that it may not be overturned, simply because some of these calls can't be overturned, even by the Command Centre. Some PI calls are about as close to the wire as it comes. Just like a regular challenge, you would need conclusive evidence that there was or wasn't a penalty. In the case of the PI call in the Montreal/Winnipeg game, I would deem that as fairly conclusive evidence.

Some penalties are, however, fairly objective in themselves: an offside is an offside, a facemask is a facemask, etc.

Offside isn't as objective as it looks: receivers are often offside and it's not called. They get a bit of leeway if they're running at the line. What's the limit of that in a replay?

Outrageously blown calls like on Friday are pretty rare. While it'd be nice to have replay fix a fiasco like that there's too much room for subjectivity in it. Replays are best when you're looking for something clear cut.

Yes, penalties 98% of the time are judgment calls. If you start reviewing judgment calls you could challenge every play.

Certain penalties ARE reviewable though, for instance I believe that too many men is reviewable.

I'm wondering now and thus I wouldn't doubt for a minute that Higgins and his crew are going over the said PI called in the Mon./Winn. game. Out of that and it was a late flag; the ball was not catchable, however there was some kind of PI/holding or what have you going on. So next time PI is called on an uncatchable ball in the endzone; instead of first and goal at the one wouldn't it be better applied for a 10 yard penalty and/or half the distance to the goal? Thoughts....?

No it should be a full penalty.

If you interfere with a receiver who is not the intended target, it is never a catchable ball, but it is still illegal contact. If the intended receiver is interfered with, often it is not catchable BECAUSE of the interference.

Interference before the ball is in the air is illegal contact.

Interference on the intended receiver while the ball is in the air is interference.

I don't really like the non-catchable ball rule at all. If the ball isn't 'catchable' then there's no reason to touch the guy in the first place.

The only time that 'non-catchable' should ever come into play is when the ball is thrown somewhere where there is clearly no possible intended receiver (like the end of the '05 Western Final). And by that I mean like no one within 20-25 yards. With multiple receivers in an are (like a hail mary) at least one of them can be deemed an intended receiver.

Great points here by all. Right now I don't need any more calls from upstairs oe else lets get rid of the on-field officials alltogether. Let's keep some simplicity in the game please even if it means less then perfection. :?

Hmm, maybe you guys are right. Admittedly, what we saw in that game was a bit of a fluke. I want every single call to be made right, but maybe that's just unrealistic on my part.

But thanks for throwing out your opinions folks. :slight_smile: