Every football coach will tell you that in order to make a difference in the game, you have to take full advantage of your opportunities.
Malik Jackson Broncos Jersey . Now, on the field that could mean scoring after your defense creates a turnover or moving
the football offensively when you have the wind at your back. On Thursday, the
CFL Board of Governors will have their opportunity to make a difference when
they vote on the proposal to make pass interference a reviewable call. A "yes"
vote means that for the first time since video review was implemented, the
system will be used on a judgment call by the refs. Coaches will not get extra
challenges but if the rule change is passed, they will be able to challenge a
called pass interference or challenge a missed called PI. Critics call it a
drastic shift in philosophy which turns the on-field refs into robots, while
proponents call it a small expansion of the current video review system that
will help the on-field officials make the toughest and most controversial call
in the game. The rules committee, which is made up of football people, passed
the rule change proposal over a month ago but while it was a strong majority, it
wasnt a unanimous "yes" vote. Sources contacted on Tuesday were divided on
whether or not the fact that it wasnt unanimous will influence the Governors.
While they couldnt come up with actual numbers, one source felt that rule change
proposals that did not get a unanimous vote from the rules committee were almost
always voted down by the Governors. A separate source didnt think that the fact
that it wasnt a unanimous vote would make any difference at all to the Board.
One thing both sources agreed on was that this is one of the most important rule
change votes in recent memory and if passed, will be a rule change that will be
watched closely by the National Football League. The NFL rules committee decided
to put a much more drastic proposal to a vote this year when they tabled the
idea of giving coaches the chance to challenge all personal foul penalties. That
is a drastic change in philosophy with regards to video replay and it was, not
surprisingly, voted down. However, if the CFL Governors vote "yes" to this PI
rule change, you can bet the NFL will be paying close attention. In fact, a
source close to the process said that there are many coaches in the NFL that are
pushing for a chance to review pass interference, so if it is voted in by the
CFL board and runs smoothly in year one, then it is safe to say it wont be long
before the NFL tables the idea again. There is also a sense of urgency with this
decision in that, when a rule change proposal gets defeated by the Governors it
typically cant be reintroduced for two years. Which means, if you are a fan that
gets frustrated with the inconsistency of the PI call, you are going to get two
more years of a whole lot of the same. The CFL head office was contacted Tuesday
and refused to comment, but football fans should not read into that. With the
current CBA negotiations on going, the "no comment" response may becoming
automatic. There has been interesting debate on this topic, however, the
question football fans have to ask is; what is the downside and the upside of a
"yes" vote? Without debating all aspects of this rule change proposal again, it
is still tough to find a real downside. Even if this change is a one year
experiment and the league finds out that it has created more questions than
answers when it comes to pass interference, nothing is really lost. If it doesnt
work, it was at least attempted, all teams in 2014 will have played by the same
rules, and the idea is dropped in 2015. However, if it works; if it does help
refs get the game changing penalty right more often and if it does improve the
game, then the CFL will be looked upon as innovators. On May 13, a new crop of
young football players will be drafted into the league and will be looking to
take full advantage of their opportunity to play the game they love for a
living. On the field, a defensive back can make a difference with an
interception if he takes advantage of an opportunity when the quarterback throws
and errant pass. On Thursday, an opportunity will present itself to the Board of
Governors. If they vote "yes," they have a chance to make a difference. If they
vote "no," it will be two more frustrating years and an opportunity lost.
Shane Ray Broncos Jersey . The Miami Heat star tops the leagues global list of top-selling jerseys for the 2012-13 season,
edging Derrick Rose of the Chicago Bulls, Kobe Bryant of the Los Angeles Lakers,
Kevin Durant of the Oklahoma City Thunder and James Heat teammate Dwyane Wade
for the No.
Paxton Lynch Broncos Jersey .ca. Hello Kerry, After watching Nino Niederreiter clobber Alex Burrows with an open-ice hit on
Wednesday, do you think he should have gotten more than the two minutes for
interference.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements
or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at
[email protected]. Hi Kerry, Quick question on Mondays Hurricanes-Leafs game -
midway through the first period with the score 2-0 for Carolina, Jordan Staals
goal on Jonathan Bernier was disallowed on what was called incidental contact on
Jiri Tlusty. The goal was immediately called off and upon review from the
broadcast booth it really didnt look like Tlusty had any influence on Berniers
ability to make that save. Should the goal have counted? Zach Poirier, Toronto
Zach: The correct call was made by referee Dave Jackson when he determined that
incidental contact existed between Jiri Tlusty and Jonathan Bernier which
sufficiently altered the Toronto goalkeepers set inside the blue paint and
prevented him from making what would have been a routine save on Jordan Staals
shot. While it may appear to be an unusually strict standard of enforcement of
rule 69 (goalkeeper interference) compared to some dirty goals we have seen
allowed, referee Jacksons call on this play is as the rule was intended to be
enforced. The overhead replay (which the referee did not have the benefit of)
clearly demonstrates that the contact from Tlusty turned Bernier away from the
puck that was about to hit his blocker and/or pad.
Sylvester Williams Broncos Jersey. There is some room for debate that Tlusty failed to execute an intended stop in front of
the crease due to some backdoor contact initiated by Leafs back-checker Mike
Santorelli. Even though the light-to-moderate pressure from Santorelli altered
Tlustys stopping process, the onus is still on the attacking forward to make a
reasonable effort to avoid such contact. For the referee to allow a goal as a
result of contact initiated by Santorelli, Tlusty would have to be pushed,
shoved, or fouled by the Toronto player as rule 69.1 states. Since none of this
existed the goal was appropriately disallowed due to incidental contact. Ray
Ferraro, my colleague on the TSN broadcast, summed up the referees decision to
disallow the goal perfectly when he said, As much as he (Tlusty) and Santorelli
are tied up, hes (Tlusty) gotta do everything he can to allow Bernier to make
the stop. He hit Berniers blocker that turns Berniers hand sideways and Dave
Jackson makes a good call. Referee Jackson had a perfect sightline from the open
side to make the correct ruling on this play. Since that is not always the case
(or seldom the case) I still champion the cause to allow video review for the
referees to determine goalkeeper interference.
Cheap Jerseys From China ' ' '
