OK Different rule base, but this caught me off guard!

[James]

Every once in a while there are posting here for the difference between NCAA and NFS rules, but nobody really talks about the finer points of the differences to Canadian rules. Looks like there are more than I realized!

[yt=425,350]d5BFaykcxGg[/yt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5BFaykcxGg

Ok - so how do you embed the youtube video? I added the http desscrpition, and it comes up with a blank box...

Edit:  To embed a youtube video, just put the last part of the link between the [yt] tags.  For this video, it is d5BFaykcxGg.

[Grant - AR]

 
   

[Osric Pureheart]

This is why Canadian football is brilliant and if there were any justice in the world they'd play it everywhere.

[JugglingReferee]

This play was all the talk after my college game.

We haven't moved the uprights off the goal line, and the ball remains live on wide field goal.  (In the US, a wide field goal will be out of bounds.)

We also don't have near the restrictions as US football does.  (We allow our running backs to twitch their pinky finger.  And for that matter, to be in motion towards the line of scrimmage.)  We also haven't taken out of the game kicking at any time.  A ball that is kicked into the end zone and goes dead in the end zone is a rouge, worth 1 point.

So when Montréal kicked the ball in, Toronto had to make sure that the ball didn't go dead in the end zone - no matter what.  That's because this was the last play of the game: no time to make up for Montréal's hopeful 1-point lead.  So they executed the "return kick".  The punter and those behind him are onside and can recover.  Offside players must give a 5-yard halo to the receiving team.  (This rule replaces your fair catch rule.)  Toronto had 3 guys in the 20-yard-deep end zone, including their kicker: Noel Prefontaine.

Montréal kicked the ball back into the end zone, hoping again for the rouge.  Toronto's attempt to purge the ball from the end zone is called a dribbled ball (since it was loose) and this attempt failed, as Montréal kept the ball in the end zone and ultimately earned the touchdown, instead of the rouge.

[LarryW60]

I propose they change the name of their game to foo-ccer. 

[110]

We allow our running backs to twitch their pinky finger.  And for that matter, to be in motion towards the line of scrimmage ..

And to add to this, of the 12 players, we could techically have (and often do have) SIX in motion, including four eligables timing their forward momentum so they are at full-tilt boogie just a smidge behind the line at the time of the snap.

[With_Two_Flakes]

The final attempt (that failed) by Blue to kick the ball out of the EZ did not look to be out of his hands. In NCAA it would be regarded as an illegal kick, I assume that action was legal in CFL?

[Kalle]

I haven't really ever seen Canadian Football, but based on this it seems to embody quite a few good things from both American Football and Rugby - maybe it's time for you State-side guys pick up a thing or several from your Canadian cousings?

[JugglingReferee]

The final attempt (that failed) by Blue to kick the ball out of the EZ did not look to be out of his hands. In NCAA it would be regarded as an illegal kick, I assume that action was legal in CFL?

The ball was never in his possession.  The NFL term is a muff for trying to obtain possession.  He just kicked a loose ball, which is legal in Canada.

Edit: Yes, the action was all legal.  There were no flags on the play and there was no missed calls either.   

[JugglingReferee]

I haven't really ever seen Canadian Football, but based on this it seems to embody quite a few good things from both American Football and Rugby - maybe it's time for you State-side guys pick up a thing or several from your Canadian cousings?

My understanding of football is that it emerged from rugby back in the 1800s.  Over time, the US codes have changed many more aspects of the game in comparison to the Canadian ruleset.

I'm not sure if a return punt by R is illegal by US codes.  If so, why?  The game is so often about field position, so if A can punt the ball, why can't B?

[Kalle]

I'm not sure if a return punt by R is illegal by US codes.  If so, why?  The game is so often about field position, so if A can punt the ball, why can't B?

At least in the NCAA code any kick after a change of team possession is an illegal kick. Somebody with the football rules history book can probably tell why it was outlawed (obviously it is legal in rugby).

[British Ref]

At least in the NCAA code any kick after a change of team possession is an illegal kick. Somebody with the football rules history book can probably tell why it was outlawed (obviously it is legal in rugby).

According to "Anatomy of a Game" the return kick was outlawed in NCAA in 1967, however no specific reason why is given. There is a discussion in the book around increasing the number of punt returns and a change to restrict kicking team players going downfield prior to the kick to ends and backs was introduced at the same time (it lasted one year).

[LarryW60]

My understanding of football is that it emerged from rugby back in the 1800s.  Over time, the US codes have changed many more aspects of the game in comparison to the Canadian ruleset.

I'm not sure if a return punt by R is illegal by US codes.  If so, why?  The game is so often about field position, so if A can punt the ball, why can't B?

(NFHS rules) Any kick which doesn't meet the requirements for a free kick or a scrimmage kick is an illegal kick.  A legal free kick must put the ball in play to start a free-kick down and a legal scrimmage kick must be made in or behind the neutral zone.  A "return kick" by R would not meet either of those two requirements.

[JugglingReferee]

(NFHS rules) Any kick which doesn't meet the requirements for a free kick or a scrimmage kick is an illegal kick.  A legal free kick must put the ball in play to start a free-kick down and a legal scrimmage kick must be made in or behind the neutral zone.  A "return kick" by R would not meet either of those two requirements.

You missed the point.  It certainly seems that it was legal at one point - that being prior to 1967.  Why was it taken out?  I think New(ish) Ref has the answer.

All you did was cite a rule.

[Diablo]

You missed the point.  It certainly seems that it was legal at one point - that being prior to 1967.  Why was it taken out? 

For as long as I can remember - Friday of Columbus Day weekend - there has been much to do about the notion that kick plays are generally unsafe.  That has led to many rule changes to address the issue, some of which have limited the number of kick plays.  Recent examples are the 30-yard succeeding spot for free kicks OB and tack-on penalty enforcement for Team A fouls.  Perhaps return kicks got swept out in that tide. 

[Welpe]

They smoke some good stuff north of the border. 

[110]

They smoke play some good stuff  football north of the border.  

Fixed that for you.

[chymechowder]

I nearly did a spit-take when I saw the deep man boot the ball out of his own endzone. 

So: prior to 1967 in the ncaa, if Team B caught a punt and return kicked it:

--was the play for Team B to catch it (and advance it too?) for better field position?

--if Team A caught the return kick, was it Team A's ball?  new series?

[Welpe]

Fixed that for you.

That's not foot all, that's rugby with pads.

I am kidding of course.

[LarryW60]

You missed the point.  It certainly seems that it was legal at one point - that being prior to 1967.  Why was it taken out?  I think New(ish) Ref has the answer.

All you did was cite a rule.

Really?

the return kick was outlawed in NCAA in 1967, however no specific reason why is given

Well I guess if "no specific reason" gave you the answer as to why the rule was changed, then more power to you.

[JugglingReferee]

For as long as I can remember - Friday of Columbus Day weekend - there has been much to do about the notion that kick plays are generally unsafe.  That has led to many rule changes to address the issue, some of which have limited the number of kick plays.  Recent examples are the 30-yard succeeding spot for free kicks OB and tack-on penalty enforcement for Team A fouls.  Perhaps return kicks got swept out in that tide.

Those enforcements are not because of safety.

What you have as a 30-yard SS, we have as a 25-yard SS enforcement.  The reason for this foul is because the team putting the ball into play did so in such a manner as to not have a return.  The game wants action, and acts not conducive to action are penalized heavily.

You'd have to be more specific about tack-on Team A fouls, but I suspect the rationale related to the ABO principle.

[JugglingReferee]

I nearly did a spit-take when I saw the deep man boot the ball out of his own endzone. 

So: prior to 1967 in the ncaa, if Team B caught a punt and return kicked it:

--was the play for Team B to catch it (and advance it too?) for better field position?

--if Team A caught the return kick, was it Team A's ball?  new series?

It's like no other double-COP.  Of course A gets a new series.

[JugglingReferee]

Really?

Well I guess if "no specific reason" gave you the answer as to why the rule was changed, then more power to you.

I've had > 1 discussion about that book and the sentiment I've had from those multiply sources was pretty clear: that the book is a mountain of information.  If that book doesn't know the answer, then trying to track down the answer just may be more trouble than it's worth.

[James]

Another aspect of the video is that B bats the first punt in the EZ forward to keep it in play.

I played Canadain rules in high school, but didn't remember any of these elements after 20 years.