Illegal Movement

The rule

Rule 4, Section 2, Article 2 – Illegal Movement

Rule change – adding clause:

“This shall include a “snap down” into a two or three point stance by an offensive lineman.”

This rule will penalize offensive linemen 5 yards for abrupt snap down into 2 or 3-point stance.

Rationale for change – To eliminate a tactic by offensive linemen, solely designed to draw the defence offside.

The analysis

This has become a new and frequent tactic by offensive linemen to draw the defence offside in the past few years. Such movement was providing an advantage to the offence to achieve first downs in short yardage situations and slowed down the game with penalties.

The verdict

This is a good rule that forces the offence to move the ball through their own merits.

Kick from Scrimmage

The rule

Rule 5, Section 4 – Kick from Scrimmage

Rule change – add as Article 3, and renumber articles that follow:

“Kick from Scrimmage Going Out of Bounds in Flight”

On a kick from scrimmage going out of bounds in flight between the 20-yard lines, the receiving team will have the option of taking possession at the point the ball went out of bounds in flight, or having a 10-yard penalty applied against the kicking team at the point of the last scrimmage, with the down repeated.

Rationale for change – Forces kicking team on punts and field goal attempts to land the ball in the field of play.

The analysis

This rule may actually provide more excitement on kick returns than the blocking rule change. Kicking out of bounds to eliminate returns has grown from being used in special situations to being used for every kick over the last ten years. I would guess the number of returnable balls had a large affect the number of exciting returns. The 20-yard line restriction is meant to protect the skill of the coffin-corner kick to pin teams deep in their end, and the penalty seems well thought out to allow teams the option of taking the ball in case of a shanked punt or repeat the down 10-yards back.

The verdict

A good rule, but I feel it could have been applied to anywhere on the field. Requiring the ball to hit the field of play before going out of bounds inside the 20′s and in the end zone will provide kickers to show a much greater level of skill than allowing them to get the ball out in the air. That would add much excitement to those coffin-corner kicking plays or when a single point is needed.

Unnecessary Roughness

The rule

Rule 7, Section 2, Article 3 – Unnecessary Roughness

Rule change – add sentence to (a) to read:

“Any player in possession of the ball, who falls to the ground without contact and is not attempting to advance the ball, may only be touched down and may not be contacted in any other manner.”

Rationale for change – Player Safety – Players on the ground are in an extremely vulnerable position and should be protected from excessive contact.

The analysis

Eliminates issue where players down on ground were taking hits that were unnecessary.

The verdict

This is a good rule that protects the safety of players and has no affect on game play.

Time In

The rule

Rule 1, Section 7, Article 4 – Time in

Rule change – add text in bold as follows:

“After a time out for any reason, time shall start again on the signal of the referee for any of the following reasons:

* When it is snapped after team A commits an offensive foul prior to the snap, inside their own 25 yd line.”

Rationale for change – Eliminate situation where teams deliberately take two consecutive pre-snap fouls in order to run time off the clock.

The analysis

This rule eliminates a loophole that allowed teams to run more than one play clock off the game clock by taking a penalty. This was slowing down the game with some very unexciting plays and giving the offence an advantage to run down the clock when time was valuable.

The verdict

A pet peeve of mine for a few years now, this is a great rule that as logical as it is should have been in place a long time ago. While it is restricted to within their own 25-yard line, it is at least a start.

Unnecessary Roughness

The rule

Rule 7, Section 2, Article 3 – Unnecessary Roughness

Rule change – add clause to read:

“Tackling an opponent by grabbing the inside collar of the side or back of the shoulders”

Rationale for change – Player Safety – Eliminating the dangerous “horse collar” tackle.

The analysis

Elimination of a type of tackle, which was rarely used, so has little effect on a defence’s ability to tackle.

The verdict

This is a good rule that will not affect game play.

Unnecessary Roughness

The rule

Rule 7, Section 2, Article 3 (h) – Unnecessary Roughness

Rule change – add specific wording:

“Contacting an opponent above the shoulders in an unnecessarily rough manner, including the long snapper on kicks from scrimmage, and convert attempts.”

Rationale for change – Player Safety – Protection for long snappers who are in a vulnerable position when snapping the ball.

The analysis

This rule protects the long-snapper, who is not an immediate factor in kick returns.

The verdict

This is a good rule that will not affect game play.

Roughing the Passer

The rule

Rule 7, Section 2, Article 4 – Roughing the Passer

Rule change – Re-word clause (c):

“All rushing defenders must make every attempt to avoid hitting a passer at or below the knees, either if their path to the passer was unrestricted, or if they are coming off a blocker”

Rationale for change – Player Safety – Defensive players must avoid contact at or below the passer’s knees.

The analysis

This rule protects the quarterback in the pocket by clarifying restrictions for contact below the knees.

The verdict

May result in more roughing the passer penalties depending on how it is called. This rule eliminates defensive players on the ground making tackle on quarterback if no contact is allowed.

Roughing the Passer

The rule

Rule 7. Section 2, Article 4 – Roughing the Passer

Rule change – add clause to read:

“Contacting the passer if either the initial source of contact, or primary source of contact, is the defender’s helmet”

Rationale for change – Player Safety – Defensive players may not lead with the head or use the head as the primary contact point to hit a passer. Ducking the head and launching at a passer is not acceptable.

The analysis

Meant to clarify the helmet-to-helmet contact rule for quarterbacks due to some incidents in 2006, this will be a tough habit for defenders to get out of when they have a clear path to the quarterback. The desire to protect quarterbacks is needed, but if this is called to the letter, the number of penalties for roughing the passer will increase drastically until defences adjust.

The verdict

This rule may have an affect on game play with many calls until defences adjust. In the end if defences do adjust, it should help eliminate quarterback head injuries.

Blocking on Kick Returns

The rule

Blocking on Kick returns

The illegal blocking rule states that player cannot contact an opponent from behind.

Rule change – To interpret a player having four sides and it is only illegal to contact the player in the back.

Rationale for change – Creates more legal blocks on the side of the defensive player.

The analysis

Reverting to the pre-2006 rule interpretation, this should open up the return game as blockers can fall back to their natural blocking behaviour. Not all return issues were due to the blocking rules, however, and will not result in a return to the offensive numbers in previous years.

The verdict

A needed change, but contrary to popular belief, not many returns were called back due to penalty after players adapted to the rules early in the season. Other factors such as increased roster sizes, special team coverage specialists and kicking to sidelines to eliminate returnable balls have affected the return game. With adjustments to two return rules, hopefully returns can become a greater part of the CFL game again. Legislating the other factors that have affected the game will be much more difficult if balance does not return to the game with these changes.

Conclusion

The rule adjustments have received positive reviews (more, more) and I feel that they are all positive steps. A few of the rules I can see getting adjusted in the future to go farther to show off the specific skills that are part of the CFL game.

While I do not have any additional on-field rule changes that I would like to see, there are two areas that I wish the CFL to address. I called for the abolishment of video review, and although it was not expected to be eliminated, I did expect the CFL to tweak it after its first year of use. There certainly are loopholes being used in the video review process. In addition, I would like to see the overtime rules revisited. During regular season play, the overtime shootout should remain, with the scrimmage line set at the 45-yard line. For playoffs and the Grey Cup, a return to a regular timed quarter should be implemented, whether that is two 10-minute halves or one additional 15-minute quarter, the clubs can decide that.

2006 CFL Grey Cup Quarter Scores

For all those that need to check Grey Cup pool tickets, here are the quarter scores for the 2006 Grey Cup between the Alouettes (East) and the Lions (West).

2006 Grey Cup Review – Montreal vs. B.C.

A lacklustre CFL season was capped off with an unspectacular Grey Cup, with only two touchdowns scored by both teams combined. The game was close late, however, with Montreal almost scoring a touchdown with just over 4 minutes left which would have pulled them within 6 points.

Week Coverage and Pre-Game Shows

Typical coverage was provided all week, but perhaps due to no big storyline in the match up and the excitement drop in games this season, there was no substantial coverage until the end of the week. The CBC‘s Saturday coverage returned to the basics of years past, a little analysis, a replay of last years Grey Cup and the Grey Cup parade. The replay was handled fairly well, with an edited version airing which did not leave any boring, uneventful sections in the game.

TSN also did a great job in their Saturday night preview show. TSN is positioning itself as the proper rights holder for the CFL and I expect great things from them if they do expand their coverage with all rights to CFL games in 2008. Sunday’s coverage on TSN‘s The Reporters was typical fare, and the Grey Cup got the lead off spot for once. I did not see the TSN preview show Sunday morning believing it was a repeat of Saturday’s. If not, someone please correct me.

CBC started their coverage three hours before game time, which is about right. Some interesting twists to their coverage were appreciated. I did not miss Brian Williams’ annual talk with the commissioner and appreciated Elliotte Friedman as a host. The Rocket Ismail segment was well done, though it could have gone into more detail, especially on his background, his departure, his career in the NFL and his feelings for the CFL for those that did not know any of the story. The on-field explanation of the B.C. attack and the Montreal methods of defending was a first for CBC I believe.

Gill Deacon providing an atmosphere meter from the crowd before the game was new, but needs some work. Gill and news-channel reporters all week constantly questioned individuals why this week is such a big event. Instead of questioning it as if they just arrived from another planet, they should just accept it and move on. I have never seen a reporter at the Super Bowl ask people why they are there. Deacon’s interview with Nelly Furtado would have been best left out, no fault to Deacon. Interviewing the half-time act is weak at best, and unless they have something interesting to say about the CFL, Canada and the like, it should be avoided.

The Game

The game was well covered. The use of 32 cameras really adds to the production values, and it was seamless with none of the technical glitches expected from a CBC broadcast using unfamiliar technology. The CableCam, I thought, was used sparingly, with few instances of it used in motion to reveal something about a play. This may have something to do with the lack of big plays in the game. A few times the CableCam was in the shot of the sideline camera showing the live play. Those people who do not like the score graphics on the screen would have been annoyed with those instances.

Mark Lee and Chris Walby had their best game of the year, with the Walby-isms kept to a minimum. Darren Flutie provided quality information from the sideline, and was used too infrequently.

The game was a defensive battle, with Montreal unable to string multiple plays together in the first half. B.C. had more success moving the ball and had the field position advantage for most of the first half. After a long half-time Montreal came out with a good third quarter to make a game of it and move me closer to the edge of my seat.

The critical play happened in the fourth quarter when on 2nd and goal from the 1 yard line Robert Edwards fumbled after being stuffed in the backfield. Montreal challenged the play but withdrew the challenge before officials could make their way to the video booth. Walby heavily criticized Montreal for not challenging; feeling that the replay showed that Edwards’ knee was done before the ball came out. The replay he was using to claim this, however, had the ball blocked from view by a player when it was coming loose. Other replays showed the ball coming out sooner, but did not have as good a view of the ball carrier’s knee. This inconclusive evidence is why Montreal would have lost the challenge. If it had occurred a minute later, it would have been automatically reviewed and Montreal would not have had to challenge. However, it could be said that Montreal did not need to save its challenge for the one minute remaining before all plays would be reviewed.

Unfortunately, Montreal did not get the ball back until late, and by then needing at least two possessions, they ran out of time. B.C. took the game, finishing off a great year for them.

Post-Game Activities

I did not watch the post game presentations intently and did not even know about the Grey Cup breaking until the next morning. I was not surprised about the Most Valuable Player and Most Valuable Canadian awards going to Dave Dickenson and Paul McCallum. For MVP it is hard to find someone else, but Dickenson’s numbers hardly say MVP. I tried to look for a defensive player, but none stood out. However, for sure Ben Cahoon’s performance on Montreal’s side should have earned him Most Valuable Canadian. Eleven receptions for 137 yards to lead all receivers far outweigh McCallum’s record tying six field goals, none of which was a pressure packed game winner.

It cannot be defended as one of the best Grey Cups in history, but I am confident that next year the CFL will return to form with exciting, wide-open play from start to finish.

Do the Tyrannical Two Get a Bad Rap?

Of course, the headline is in jest, but we are talking about the Tom Wright-opponents David Braley and Robert Wetenhall. Tom Wright handled his final Grey Cup with grace and dignity much like his first when he was announced as commissioner at the last minute after objections (reports say) by David Braley.

Stephen Brunt believes all the CFL fans who have villain-ized Braley and Wetenhall over the Wright affair should actually show appreciation to these franchise owners. They have taken losses and kept the CFL alive when no one else was willing to step up for those franchises.

While these pages have been critical of Braley and Wetenhall, I do not overlook their contributions to the CFL. I too believe Braley is very deserving of a successful B.C. Lions franchise and one of those who deserves credit for the survival of the CFL the last 20 years. Also on that list of persons deserving credit are anyone who has had ownership of a CFL franchise in the last 20 years, especially American franchise owners and even Bernie Glieberman. The NFL provided a cash infusion in 1997, without which the CFL likely would not exist. As important have been the fans, who have turned through the turnstiles, bought souvenirs, watched on television and funded both the private and community owned franchises, keeping them from reaching that point of insolvency. I know one person who has added up what he has spent on the CFL the past 15 years and the total comes to over $15,000. That may be nothing to David Braley, but not everyone can be as fortunate as he is, and $15,000 is a nice mortgage payment to anyone across the country I think. I personally wrote a cheque (which was cashed) to the CFL office during one of their ownership forays in Ottawa in the early ’90′s to keep the franchise (and the CFL) going. Fans have bled money plenty on this league as well.

My problem with the way the situation was handled is the shortsightedness of the decision. Much has been made of the fact the CFL has had nine commissioners the last 15 years. Wright was by far the best of them. Braley had a say in keeping or hiring all commissioners from 1996 on, including Wright. If, as Brunt says, Braley was concerned about Wright’s business skills, why not take the effort to split the role, leave Wright as the figurehead face of the league and fans and sponsors identify with and hire the guy you want to drive the revenues at the rate you want? After three years, the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t. Little has been said about potential candidates for the position, but I highly doubt anybody can grow revenues at a faster rate than currently, which is growing at a natural rate corresponding to the return of acceptance of the CFL.

Unless the new commissioner’s mandate will be to drive revenue by granting expansion franchises at $5-7.5 million a pop, he will have a very hard time creating the profitable business for Braley to cover his losses the last 10 years. Wetenhall believes that revenue can come from US expansion franchises, but that counts only the money expansion brings in and ignores the lack of growth it provides the CFL. No increase in Canadian TV revenue, no American TV contract, and a reduced share of league dispersments (unless you expect American franchises to not share in the Canadian TV contract).

While private owners do have their private money invested in the team that is no reason to discount the vote of community owned teams. For league issues, if a community team is standing in the way of progress, that is not what their mandate from their fans is. For individual team issues, they need to work together and not force every franchise into the same hole. It is not in the interest of the game and community franchises to try risky efforts to grow the game, like American expansion, just so they can retrieve lost money and exit before the league collapses. This experiment was tried already and we do not need to repeat it unless there is a plan to address the issues with it.

Tom Wright is gone, and the next commissioner may do great things in driving revenue for the league, getting Wetenhall and Braley to that point of profitability they are seeking. If it is slower than they expect, will they resort to driving risky plans, whether expansion or otherwise, to try to achieve those revenues? As trust holders of the great Canadian game and businesspersons, they owe the public strong, detailed plans of their ideas. This will help overcome fan distrust of the two most private owners in the league, who on fleetingly give glimpses to fans of their CFL vision currently.

CFL Notes

The minor rise in Grey Cup ratings in a year where the consensus has been the product was not as exciting as years past and general viewership was done points to a change of attitude around accepting our own game. The average viewership of 3.202 million people was 1% higher than last year. I definitely feel there are fewer people who will avoid the CFL over embarrassment that is Canadian.

Alouettes re-sign players before salary cap deadline.

Stamps sign Boerigter. CFL play should rise with players returning to the league. That is if Calgary can find a quarterback to develop a rapport with Boerigter.

Winnipeg says 2006 Grey Cup a success. The game was a sellout, and all-receipts counted should wipe out the Bomber debt. That should lead to them being profitable next year barring unforeseen circumstances. A debt free team is much more attractive for David Asper to buy a piece to help drive new stadium plans.

The CFL needs to fix the game in the offseason. Luckily the drop off was so abrupt, it cannot be ignored for years like the NHL. I hope to express my thoughts on changes required in an offseason article.

Unlike a normal CFL commissioner search, very few candidates are known, but apparently there is no shortage of them. One leaked candidate is NHL senior VP for broadcasting John Shannon. He is thought to be a frontrunner, though his skills do not match up with what the aforementioned David Braley wants in a new league head.

The CFL should address betting on air to make games more interesting says one scribe. What do you think? Better to keep an arms length or embrace it?

Will Toronto be ready for the Grey Cup return in 2007? Only time will tell now. The game may be a sellout, but the city atmosphere is what they will be judged on.

Week Coverage and Pre-Game Shows

Leading up to the games, the coverage was fairly average and basic all week. The CFL received very little play on shows like Off The Record, TSN‘s The Reporters and Prime Time Sports with Bob McCown. All networks and print coverage focused on the same few angles in their regular sports reporting, beating them to death. The CBC‘s Saturday and Sunday pre-game shows were average. Improved from last week in their flow and analysis, but they did not break any new ground.

2006 CFL East Final – Toronto at Montreal

• The opening kick-off is actually missed; CBC cuts to live coverage from the Game Story with the ball in the air.
• The building filled up in ten minutes, but only 33-34,000 expected? That is break even. Seems like the honeymoon is really over for the Alouettes in Montreal.
• Armitage: “He’s got a man wide open.” well after the catch is made.
• First turnover by Montreal – looks like Calvillo was pulling the ball out and lost the handle. The ball was falling to the ground by the time he saw Fletcher.
• Flutie: I doubt any offence calls naked bootlegs Sally Ran (sic) anymore. Keep up with the jargon.
• Final verdict: Replays have hurt the CFL. The 3rd quarter debacle better lead to some changes or the abolishing of the system (fat chance). The whistle ended the play and the Alouette player was never tackled, how could it be overturned? These plays were never the intent of the challenge system. No other sport allows reversals after the whistle to stand.

2006 CFL West Final – Saskatchewan at B.C.

• The CFL/CBC cannot wait 60 seconds to kick off the West Final? They are already 15 minutes over, but we get the double screen instead and no wrap up of the East game.
• Early chance for the ‘Riders after a turnover. Two more time count penalties. They were not prepared for the noise. Some running plays could have helped in this situation rather than trying to audible at the line.
• Speaking of the noise, what ever happened to the rule for opposing teams facing crowd noise, allowing them to go back to the huddle? I do not remember the exact details, but it was brought in with the introduction of B.C. Place stadium. I believe in home field advantage, but certain cities have too great an advantage. A rule to balance this levels the field in a very disparate-teamed league.
• Mark Lee asks “You gotta watch the football, right?” and receives silence. That is a great colour commentator partner.
• There goes Walby and his unique interpretation of the rules. Last week the ball was live, he says, because the pitch was behind the line of scrimmage. First, I do not remember any such play, and second, does he know what the line of scrimmage is? Me thinks Walby needs to attend one of those Football 101 classes for women (no offence to women, but that is what they are).
• Overheard before commercial: Walby – “Way to go guys, way to go.”
• Lee: “You never want to question whether a player is injured or not.” So why did you just do it prior to that statement?
• Walby rewrites history, saying Casey Printers started the Grey Cup 2 years ago but failed to get it done. History argues that Printers stayed on the bench the whole game, and coach Wally Buono was severely criticized for not replacing Dave Dickenson with Printers who had won the Most Outstanding Player award that year.
• Ratings will be down for both games likely. Unfortunate that the West Final could not have been closer instead of total dominance in all facets by the Lions.

Post-Game Coverage

The CBC post-game coverage was very quick. Sports coverage was very limited and focused on stories not relating to the game like whether this was Damon Allen’s last game, Ricky Williams’ last game, whether Danny Barrett will be fired. There was no coverage of the CFL on the Monday Off The Record show or Prime Time Sports with Bob McCown. Receiving heavy coverage around the Argo loss were comments by Arland Bruce III regarding the officiating. Continuing with the theme all year, the CFL received reduced and less than positive coverage through the playoffs.

Overall Review

Despite the stakes in these games, the visiting teams came out flat. Toronto turned it around with the insertion of the more mobile Michael Bishop, and if the replay system was not implemented, it might have been closer without the Ricky Williams fumble, which was so close, it would be hard to call it a fumble watching in real-time.

In Vancouver, the ‘Riders were unprepared for a team that came ready to play. They showed no ability to be able to counter things like the crowd, a blitzing defence, or the B.C. rushing attack. This led to the game being over at half time. A late 3rd quarter spurt by the ‘Riders kept some loyalists glued to their sets, but for all purposes the game was over.

A B.C. – Montreal Grey Cup match will hopefully provide an exciting close championship contest and fans glued to their sets from Quebec and Vancouver and across the country. We will have our review of that match up next week.

2006 CFL East Semi-Final – Montreal at Toronto

• “Pinball” Clemons catching the punt on the sidelines and taking off with it shows the kind of unpretentious atmosphere the CFL provides.
• The crowd looked like at least 30,000 to me, but apparently, the Argos could only muster 26,214 with only a week to sell tickets.
• The Semi-Final stadium signage sure helps dress up the stadium to give it a better feel.
• Steve Armitage is calling the game. The CBC cannot be serious about the CFL when Armitage and Mark Lee are your only play-by-play guys. They do not exactly have the legacy of Don Whitman, but for reporters to be calling for Whitman’s return is ridiculous. Whitman is past his prime and that is why he lost his job to Chris Cuthbert years ago. What would he be like now years later?
• Is it me or does the CBC like to show two plays, go to commercial, show two plays and cut to commercial?
• It is too bad Ricky Williams big catch and run was called back on a holding call. Best play for Ricky all season.
• Winnipeg took a procedure call at Toronto’s 5-yard line on 3rd and 1, trying to draw Toronto offside. Showing no confidence in their offence just getting the first down, they cost themselves 4 points, the margin of victory.
• The first half was a little slow, but overall the game was outstanding with great plays (Armstrong’s catch, Bruce’s run), lead changes, storylines (Roberts, Stegall, Bishop) and a down to the wire finish.

2006 CFL West Semi-Final – Saskatchewan at Calgary

• Bad transition to the next game. “Can I get some water, please?” Friedman is overheard saying after congratulating the panel on a good job.
• Mark Lee – awful. Chris Walby – incomprehensible. You cannot tell me these are the best guys available.
• A punt return touchdown. The return game may play a part in the playoffs after taking the season off.
• Just before the half, with the ‘Riders driving, the debate starts about if the ‘Riders will go to the end zone before kicking a field goal. Did they think that they would really set the ball position for a field goal? Not much to take credit for afterwards. In fact minus points for suggesting that positioning the ball to the middle of the field for the field goal try was an option.
• The crowd is supposed to be loud. I cannot hear it. Turn up the crowd noise CBC. It sounds like the crowd noise is coming from a bar in Saskatchewan.
• Calgary was the only team to use the instant replay in both games. They won their first in what becomes a judgement call as to whether there is evidence that Thurman’s knee was down. Calgary lost the second challenge and their timeout on Burris’ fumble where video could not show anything in the pile.
• Nice finish for ‘Rider fans, watching time tick away on Calgary. However, a late touchdown by Calgary could have kept the score closer and interest in the game. Still, a great game that came down to the last minute.

Overall Review

Two high scoring games start the 2006 CFL playoffs. When real meaningful games are on the line you know the game is never over. Coaches and players will turn bad starts or momentum swings around when you are playing for advancement to the next round. We expect much more excitement the rest of the way.