Glen Johnson's reddit AMA

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

Post Reply
User avatar
sj-roc
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7539
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 2:39 pm
Location: Kerrisdale

CFL VP of Officiating Glen Johnson had an AMA on reddit today where he took questions from fans for 90 mins.

I won't bother quoting the whole thing as some of the Q's were rather disgruntled or otherwise not worth bothering with (and were rightly left unanswered). But he spoke, among other things, about the new PI challenge and a proposed enhancement for enforcing the no yards rule, and also got into some of the stuff that constitutes Objectionable Conduct:
Q: What's your view on PI being a reviewable call this season? Do you think the enormous pause in the game is worth getting the right call?

GJ: PI is the hardest call for us to get right. There are so many variables to it. Reviewing these calls has helped us get some right that we made a mistake on. I think it is worth taking the time necessary to get these calls right - the penalty is huge.

Q: Pass interference? Not reviewable in the NFL right?

GJ: Correct, it is not reviewable in the NFL.

...

Q: We're coming up on a full season since the reviewable pass interference experiment began. How have your crews, the teams, and the fans been responding to the implementation, and has that response changed any since preseason?

GJ: Our crews are fine with it. It hasn't changed how they officiate. At the beginning everyone has high hopes for change. I don't know that it is any different now. We are currently assessing how well it is going. Fans and teams are debating its success.

...

Q: Has the CFL ever considered changing the "no yards" rules for punts? It seems it's being called more and more every season and to be honest, it seems like a hard rule to enforce accurately.

GJ: The Rules Committee has considered altering the No Yards rule in the past. It came up again last year. One club proposed we use a technology halo on TV to be more consistent with it. We are always looking to innovate if it makes the game better.

...

Q: Mr. Johnson, Sorry in advance for the difficult questions but please elaborate why the n word is banished but not the f word? The slur was directed at Bo Levi Mitchell earlier this year. Also, why is the CFL not more transparent with the list of banned words?

GJ: The "f" word is not allowed. Sometimes the TV catches audio that the officials don't hear. But if an official had, it would have drawn a flag. There is no specific list but categories of words that are banned; all racial or ethnic slurs, anything to do with sexual orientation or religious affiliation.
You can read the whole thing here.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

sj-roc wrote:CFL VP of Officiating Glen Johnson had an AMA on reddit today where he took questions from fans for 90 mins............
Thanks for posting, sj-roc. What I liked is his concept of officiating sounds based in what I want CONSISTENCY. That was a word that is obviously important to him but its still a concept the officials need to keep working on.

I feel bad because I can not think of a job that someone else does that I complain more about. Honestly though, I know the WORST CFL official does a better job than I would.....
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

Since there are several officiating crews, I'm willing to accept a bit of inconsistency from one crew to another as long as they seem to be working toward uniformity.

What I do not accept is the inconsistency coming out of the Command Centre which has the same crew looking at replays every game and yet they are quite inconsistent. We have seen them call penalties on a challenge review that was evident on film but missed by the ref and the challenging HC and we have seen them ignore such infractions. :dizzy:

So what are the rules? Can the Command Centre make up the rules as they go along as they seem to be doing? Can the Command Centre legally call penalties that the refs decide to let go or have missed and are not being challenged by a team?
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

Good post sj-roc. And I agree with nota and Dano that it is the inconsistency--by a crew within a game--that makes me pull out what little hair I have left (I stole that from nota, but it applies!). I'd like to see a crew meet with each team at the beginning of a game and go over what they will be focusing on during the game; in other words give the teams a heads-up so that they can play accordingly. As for specific rules, I would really like the league to reconsider the no-yards penalty. In my view, it is a penalty waiting to happen on every punt, and is undoubtedly very difficult for the officials to get right consistently. Although the American punt-receiving rule is not purrfect, I prefer it to the CFL rule. In the US rule, the punt-coverage guys have to give the returner, I believe, 2 yards. If the coverage guys are close, the returner will often call for a fair catch. However, lots of punts are returned in the NFL, and fair catches are sometimes muffed. So the punt returns can turn out to be exciting plays, and there are very few penalties called on them--usually none at all in a game. Last year, for example, Golden Tate made a lot of exciting punt returns for the Seahawks. So, while a fair catch may lack pizzazz, the US rule at least precludes what seems, in the CFL, like a penalty on the majority of punt returns. I'd have to check on whether it really is the majority, but it seems like it.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Interesting thread, sj.

A topic close to the emotional heat level of many fans. Not so much with me. As a coach, for me, as long as the officials are unbiased, and getting the vast majority of calls seemingly correct, i have no problem with them. IMO good and bad calls even out. I know what referees and umpires go through. Been there. Done that.

If a coach constantly rags on the referee, does one expect any close calls to go your way? No. If you treat them in a civil manner, it is extremely unlikely that they will deliberately go against you on a close call.

Re no yards ... Gonna get an exact measurement of five yards? No. But a ref or umpire can see relative distance. One can sense that a punt cover man is about five yards away. Close enough. Within five yards? Also detectable, if at four or three yards. Close calls, about five yards? Well if it is close, then the cover man is about five yards away. Let him go, as the returner has room and safety. If he is four or three yards away, it becomes easier to call. The idea is some protection for the returner.

The onus is on the cover team to use judgment. I would much prefer to keep all punts live. Must be returned. Must be covered. Recoverable by the kicking team also. Makes for some wild onside plays. I can easily live with the no yards rule. Close call judgements happen in all sports. A strike? A ball? Offside? Interference? A foul? Hooking?

Just be fair. No bias. And as long as the leagues treat the entire referee process with professionalism.

From a coaching point of view, squawking about bad calls is for the losing team. I have seen bad refereeing at the amateur level, biased reffing. Some times you have to beat the referee too, along with the opposing team.

I like the PI review.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12581
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

WestCoastJoe wrote:Interesting thread, sj.

A topic close to the emotional heat level of many fans. Not so much with me. As a coach, for me, as long as the officials are unbiased, and getting the vast majority of calls seemingly correct, i have no problem with them. IMO good and bad calls even out. I know what referees and umpires go through. Been there. Done that.

If a coach constantly rags on the referee, does one expect any close calls to go your way? No. If you treat them in a civil manner, it is extremely unlikely that they will deliberately go against you on a close call.

Re no yards ... Gonna get an exact measurement of five yards? No. But a ref or umpire can see relative distance. One can sense that a punt cover man is about five yards away. Close enough. Within five yards? Also detectable, if at four or three yards. Close calls, about five yards? Well if it is close, then the cover man is about five yards away. Let him go. If he is four or three yards away, it becomes easier to call. The idea is some protection for the returner.

The onus is on the cover team to use judgment. I would much prefer to keep all punts live. Must be returned. Must be covered. Recoverable by the kicking team also. Makes for some wild onside plays. I can easily live with the no yards rule. Close call judgements happen in all sports. A strike? A ball? Offside? Interference? A foul? Hooking?

Just be fair. No bias. And as long as the leagues treat the entire referee process with professionalism.

From a coaching point of view, squawking about bad calls is for the losing team. I have seen bad refereeing at the amateur level, biased reffing. Some times you have to beat the referee too, along with the opposing team.

I like the PI review.
:thup: Well said. I'm not so sure about the PI review. I was opposed to it initially, but if it cuts down on some of the complaints from coaches and fans, I'm prepared to give it more time.

It seems to be a particularly Canadian trait to whine about officiating in any sport. Judgment calls are part of the game, and tend to even out over time. Coaches and players determine the outcome of games. Blaming the officials for a bad call is just an excuse for losers.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

B.C.FAN wrote:
WestCoastJoe wrote:Interesting thread, sj.

A topic close to the emotional heat level of many fans. Not so much with me. As a coach, for me, as long as the officials are unbiased, and getting the vast majority of calls seemingly correct, i have no problem with them. IMO good and bad calls even out. I know what referees and umpires go through. Been there. Done that.

If a coach constantly rags on the referee, does one expect any close calls to go your way? No. If you treat them in a civil manner, it is extremely unlikely that they will deliberately go against you on a close call.

Re no yards ... Gonna get an exact measurement of five yards? No. But a ref or umpire can see relative distance. One can sense that a punt cover man is about five yards away. Close enough. Within five yards? Also detectable, if at four or three yards. Close calls, about five yards? Well if it is close, then the cover man is about five yards away. Let him go, as the returner has room and safety. If he is four or three yards away, it becomes easier to call. The idea is some protection for the returner.

The onus is on the cover team to use judgment. I would much prefer to keep all punts live. Must be returned. Must be covered. Recoverable by the kicking team also. Makes for some wild onside plays. I can easily live with the no yards rule. Close call judgements happen in all sports. A strike? A ball? Offside? Interference? A foul? Hooking?

Just be fair. No bias. And as long as the leagues treat the entire referee process with professionalism.

From a coaching point of view, squawking about bad calls is for the losing team. I have seen bad refereeing at the amateur level, biased reffing. Some times you have to beat the referee too, along with the opposing team.

I like the PI review.
:thup: Well said. I'm not so sure about the PI review. I was opposed to it initially, but if it cuts down on some of the complaints from coaches and fans, I'm prepared to give it more time.

It seems to be a particularly Canadian trait to whine about officiating in any sport. Judgment calls are part of the game, and tend to even out over time. Coaches and players determine the outcome of games. Blaming the officials for a bad call is just an excuse for losers.
Thanks, BCFAN

For me the idea of the no yards rule is to give some protection to the returner. And yet I do want to see a return of some sort. Punt return. Punt coverage. Essential part of the game. Just having the no yards rule automatically gives some protection to the returner. The cover team knows they cannot tee off and attempt to try a hit an instant after the catch.

Plus there are both the 15 yard and the 5 yard penalty for no yards. I have no problem penalizing a cover team that is undisciplined enough to draw the penalty. Cover team having to retreat from the five yard restraining area? Good for the returner. Penalized while retreating in the restraining area? Too bad. Develop your sense of space on the field. And I have no problem rewarding the return team.

If the cover team is forced to back up out of the restraining zone, and this leads to a huge return, so much the better, in my view. If the cover team is caught in no man's land, and there is a huge return, refuse the penalty. Almost like a free play.

As noted, with all punts live, the cover team can also come up with creative onside plays.

Judgment? Not a problem for me. As agreed, it runs through pro sports.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

I agree that we have to tolerate judgment in refs' calls, but the less this is the case the better IMO. The most troublesome no-yards calls--at least in my view--are the ones where the coverage guy intrudes on the 5-yard radius, but realizing it, busts his tail to get out of it, but gets called anyway. In such a case, the coverage guy is retreating--and as a result giving the returner even more room and opportunity than would have been true had he stayed 5 yards away but was ready to pounce. So it's advantage returner, but the kicking team gets called anyway.

The idea of a "technology halo" (evidently suggested by one team) might be worth pursuing. But I'd hate to see it take up a lot of time after the play. If the command centre was closely monitoring each game as it was being played, this device could perhaps be implemented as the play was actually taking place, with a communication to the referee at the same time. But that technological implementation may be a bridge too far, at least at this point.

And I agree completely about coaches ragging on the officials. You see it all the time--in both the CFL and NFL--and you have to think that ultimately it's counterproductive, likely working against the complaining team. And, although it's true that blown calls tend to even out in a season (and I don't perceive bias to be much of a factor in the CFL--although I could be wrong about that), one such call can decide a game. In such a case the "make-up" call may come later and at a point where it doesn't really affect the outcome.
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

South Pender wrote:........that makes me pull out what little hair I have left (I stole that from nota, but it applies!). ......
:bang: I KNEW I SHOULD HAVE TRADEMARKED THAT LINE :wink:

What I hate most about Johnson's new position is that he IS NO LONGER DIRECTLY officiating games. I thought he did a good job. As for this thread, I'd also have to agree with DanoT's comment regarding the inconsistency coming out of comman central (or whatever its called. Perhaps its a 'percieved' inconsistency but its there nonetheless and its even comment on by the broadcasters.

One thing about NFL (I know, I know some of us are always comparing the NFL but its similar enough to do so, IMO) is all the broadcasters now seem to have a past member of the officiating department (IOW, a past official or someone in the department). EVEN THEY ARE WRONG on predictions but they seem closer in being right and they usually bring up parts of a rule that clearly help explain. IIRC, Kerry Fraser (ex-NHL official) had (HAS?) a column where he dissects calls explaining how an official probably came to a call that seems to come out of nowhere to some of us. What I'm trying to say is that it is neat hearing some former officials ideas about particular calls. The other thing I like about some NFL officiating calls is that they do SOMETIMES just admit a call was blown and leave it at that. Trying to whitewash and/or explain/justify a bad call doesn't work, if its a blown call admit it and move on......
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

sj-roc wrote:I won't bother quoting the whole thing as some of the Q's were rather disgruntled or otherwise not worth bothering with (and were rightly left unanswered). .............
I think some of the questions that were left unanswered were addressed, just not by Glen Johnson....

http://www.tsn.ca/argos-gm-barker-ticat ... l-1.119682

There were a few different ways Johnson was asked about Barker and now that he's been fined and barred from the sidelines.... maybe (its just a maybe, only Johnson knows) that is why those questions were ignored since the CFL was looking into doing something?
User avatar
sj-roc
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7539
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 2:39 pm
Location: Kerrisdale

notahomer wrote:
sj-roc wrote:I won't bother quoting the whole thing as some of the Q's were rather disgruntled or otherwise not worth bothering with (and were rightly left unanswered). .............
I think some of the questions that were left unanswered were addressed, just not by Glen Johnson....

http://www.tsn.ca/argos-gm-barker-ticat ... l-1.119682

There were a few different ways Johnson was asked about Barker and now that he's been fined and barred from the sidelines.... maybe (its just a maybe, only Johnson knows) that is why those questions were ignored since the CFL was looking into doing something?
Hmmm, interesting; that wasn't even one of the ones I had in mind with my comment. I wonder if Skulsky is breaking any rules with his almost constant sideline presence?

Johnson probably ignored that one as it seems the league was still deliberating on the matter at the time. Kind of like how litigants are reluctant to comment publicly on a court case they're involved in until it's settled.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.
Post Reply