Tom Higgins
CFL.ca
Do penalties decide football games? They certainly can help or hurt a team, and media and fans alike sometimes point to an official’s call as a turning point in a game. But after a lifetime in football, I am more inclined to believe penalties reflect how the game was played, more than dictate who wins. To test this theory, I took a closer look at the stats from Week 11 in the CFL.
Our games that week were won by 10, 22, 30 and 22 points, respectively. The average point differential was 21 while three of the four games were blowouts. But the penalty differential was much closer.
Out of the 68 penalties called that weekend, 38 per cent were called on the winning teams, and 62 per cent were called on the losing teams. In my opinion, those penalty totals reflected which teams were more disciplined and, perhaps in one-sided contests, which became frustrated. But they obviously don’t account for the lopsided scores.
So other than total points (there is always a smart-aleck who points that out!), what usually decides football games? Almost always, it’s turnovers. In Week 11, the winning teams were “plus 9’ on takeaways versus giveaways.
That means they were consistently on the receiving end of more interceptions, fumbles and turnovers on downs. In fact, in the first 48 games of the CFL schedule this year, 45 were won by the team that won the turnover battle. The team that took better care of the football won 92 per cent of the time. That’s why coaches look so pained on the sideline after a fumble or interception.
Turnovers are simply huge, and yet it’s human nature sometimes to blame the ref instead of a mistake committed by your favourite quarterback or running back.
The importance of turnovers might explain why coaches can be reluctant to gamble on trick plays. But teams, and players, do tend to take some risks as the race to the playoffs heats up. If you’re facing the same team for a second or third time, the element of surprise can be a big advantage. Several of you asked about laterals after we had two of them back on Labour Day weekend.
There was one in Hamilton, when Tiger-Cat Dave Stala caught a long pass, and then tossed the ball to a teammate, and one in Calgary, where Eskimos returner Jason Armstead fielded a punt and then threw an overhand pass to teammate Adarius Bowman near the opposite sideline.
Some of you questioned the fact that both plays were ruled to be legal lateral passes. Here are a few points to make on the lateral – a play which taps into our game’s rugby roots. Attempted laterals are reviewable at the request of coaches. The key to a successful review, of course, can be whether the Command Centre has a very good replay angle, so it can determine if the pass was indeed a lateral or an illegal forward pass.
Our post-game evaluation of the Stala “lateral” determined that, if it had been reviewed, it would have deemed an illegal forward pass by the Command Centre. The ball would have come back to where Stala attempted the pass. The Edmonton play was incredibly close, and it’s unlikely the Command Centre would have had the kind of “indisputable evidence” required to overturn the call on the field.
One other point to remember: while some fans might say a lateral has to be thrown to someone behind the ball carrier, the rule book says that the two players could also be side-by-side. The exact language is: “A lateral or onside pass is one thrown, handed, knocked, batted or fumbled by a player parallel or in the direction of (one’s) own Dead Line.”
Here are some other questions from fans:
Q from Richard: Over the last couple of games, there have been incidents where the kicking team on punts has touched the ball first. It looked like that if it was in the air, the penalty was 15 yards, but when it hit the ground and bounced and hit the kicking team’s player first, it was only considered a five-yard penalty. Why is it that when the kicking team touches the ball first, it’s not an automatic 15-yard penalty? If the receiving team doesn’t have a chance to get the ball, it kills their chances of a big return. With the rule as it sits, the kicking team should automatically touch the ball if it hits the ground to avoid any return greater than five yards. Are the officials applying the rule correctly?
Tom Higgins: Richard, when the cover team touches a punted ball before the receiving team, it is a 15-yard penalty, even if the ball has bounced first. But there are a few exceptions to that general rule.
1. The kicker or another onside player from the kicking team can not only touch the ball – they can recover it.
2. If a member of the cover team is “inadvertently touched first by the ball, which has previously hit the ground, and he has made no attempt to play the ball in any way,” it’s only a five yard penalty. The most obvious example of that would occur when a player is running down the field to cover a punt that is shanked, and it bounces and hits him in the back of the leg.
He may have had no idea where the ball was. As you know, no yards generally worked like this: if the kick bounces, and is fielded by the return team and the cover team has not yielded a five-yard radius around the ball, it’s a five-yard penalty. If the kick hasn’t bounced, and it is fielded by the return team “on the fly”, and the cover team has not yet yielded a five yard radius around the ball, it’s a fifteen yard penalty.
Q from Cliff: A pass interference call against the Alouettes early in their (Labour Day) game led to the first Tiger-Cats touchdown. The Als’ defender was turned towards the ball when he collided with the receiver and actually had an equal chance to catch it. I keep hearing this is a reason why pass interference is NOT called on similar plays. Why was it called this time? I believe it was the turning point of the game.
TH: That is an excellent question, Cliff, and I decided to make like Henry Burris and perform a hand off to an expert. Al McColman is a former on-field official in our league – one of our best ever, and one of our most experienced, in fact. This year, for the first time in league history, we took a page out of our football teams’ book and introduced the concept of “position coaches” for officials.
Al coaches our “deep officials”, and they are responsible for most pass interference calls or non-calls. Here’s his reply:
“These defensive backs are getting better and better at covering right to the letter of the law – on the edge of legality. This is a very close play, but it was my belief at the game that although Montreal’s defender (Dwight Anderson) did indeed turn his head to play the ball, but he launched himself at the receiver and contacted him with a shoulder with the purpose of using that contact to make it impossible for Hamilton’s receiver (Chris Williams) to catch the ball. When I watched the play again yesterday, when I went through the first half for evaluation, I thought the same thing. And after looking at it again today, I see nothing to change my mind.”
By the way, when he says DB’s are getting better and better at covering to the letter of the law, that’s a compliment to them and their coaches. But it also makes what is probably the toughest call in our game – pass interference – even more challenging.
Don’t forget to send in your questions to asktheref@cfl.ca
