Advertisement

CFL could make history by allowing pass interference calls to be subject to video review

andrew bucholtz

One of the most common complaints about officiating at any level of football is about the inconsistency of pass interference calls, but the CFL is looking to change that. The league's rules committee is set to meet Thursday to discuss rule changes for the 2014 season, and among the proposals they'll be voting on is one that would see coaches be able to challenge both called and non-called pass interference penalties under certain conditions, prompting a video review from the league's command centre. The inconsistency of pass interference calls and non-calls have long been questioned and complained about by players, coaches and fans of football at all levels, but this is one of the first attempts to actually change how the penalty is assessed. As noted in the league's release about the proposed new rules, this would make the CFL the first football league to make pass interference reviewable:

Under a proposal to be voted on Thursday evening by the league’s Rules Committee, coaches would be allowed to challenge both called and potential defensive pass interference fouls under certain conditions.

If it passes, the CFL could become the first football league to subject pass interference to video review.

“This is more than innovative. In the world of officiating, for all sports, it’s revolutionary,” said Glenn Johnson, the CFL’s Vice-President of Officiating.

“Leagues have been reluctant to subject ‘judgment calls’ to video review, and pass interference in football is the ultimate ‘judgment call”, because it involves so many subjective elements. It will be interesting to see if the Committee approves it, and whether our Board of Governors, which is our ultimate authority on rules, also ratifies it.”

Under the proposal, a team would be able use any and all of its Coaches’ Challenges to challenge a called or potential pass interference foul up to the final three minutes of a game. In the final three minutes of a game, and overtime, a team could only challenge such a call or non-call one time, and only if it still has an unused challenge and a timeout remaining.

While some will undoubtedly question making judgement calls reviewable, there's potential in this plan because pass interference isn't completely subjective. (If it was, this would only mean transferring the burden of the final judgement call from the on-field officials to the command centre.) Some of the existing uncertainty and subjectivity with pass interference calls is certainly due to different officials' perspectives on how it should be called, but a lot of it is thanks to incomplete information. Contact between receivers and defensive backs can happen from a variety of angles, but each particular on-field official only sees it from one angle, and seeing it live means they only get a brief glimpse of what happened. Meanwhile, viewers at home often have a better look at the situation thanks to the availability of slow-motion replays from multiple angles on the TV feed.

Adding the ability for coaches to challenge potential pass-interference situations won't eliminate judgement entirely, as the Command Centre officials will still have to make somewhat subjective decisions on what is and isn't a foul (and the on-field officials' rulings will still matter; calls stand even under a challenge if there isn't conclusive evidence to overturn them, and most calls won't be challenged). Subjecting these calls to video review will mean that the people in charge of calling the game have as much or more information as a typical TV viewer at home, and from this corner, that's an extremely positive step. It's also one that could be precedent-setting; if this goes through, expect other football leagues (including the NFL) to keep an eye on it and perhaps bring in similar plans themselves down the road.

The other rule changes under discussion are also important. Expanding the command centre's role to cover automatically reviewing turnovers (currently challengeable, but not automatically reviewed except as a part of scoring plays) and illegal participation makes sense; again, the command centre has more information than the officials on the field, so this would mean getting more calls right, which is the crucial end goal. The various safety changes proposed (including taking out low blocks delivered anything other than straight on against an opponent, removing blocks from behind in the tackle box, and codifying that delivering a blow above the shoulders is illegal) also seem strong, and some of those are ideas that have been percolating for a while. It's interesting too that the league is looking at allowing offences to play at a faster pace by preventing defensive substitutions if the offence hurries, which could bring in some of the exciting hurry-up, no-huddle offensive strategies we've seen used to great effect in the NCAA ranks. There's also a change proposed to count blocked field goals as missed field goals going forward, which would have dramatically changed things last season. Still, as notable as all of those are, it's the video review of pass interference that's going to get the most attention. If the CFL goes forward with this plan, it could be a historic step, and one that enables the league to get more calls right.