Around the League - Regular Season Discussion (Redux)

[Noeller]

the issue isn't the suspension handed down, it's the current state of the PA and how much it will "allow". The rules need to be changed, so harsher penalties can be handed down, uncontested, when warranted...

[JCon]

Just now, Noeller said:

the issue isn't the suspension handed down, it's the current state of the PA and how much it will "allow". The rules need to be changed, so harsher penalties can be handed down, uncontested, when warranted...

Exactly. Everyone at the CFL head office could have agreed a 9-game suspension was warranted but current CBA wouldn't allow it.

I'm only speculating because I'm not sure what the CBA would allow, what the PA would allow and what the feelings of the Commish and the brain trust are.

[blue_gold_84]

37 minutes ago, JCon said:

Scenarios:

One-game suspension and Hill does not appeal.

or

Two-game suspension and Hill does appeal, like the Carter gong show of last season.

 

Which is better for league? What if the CFL didn't think it could win an appeal on a two-game suspension?

Good point. The appeal process for suspensions is ridiculous. I think it needs to change: appeals are only considered for suspensions of three games or more.

[Taynted_Fayth]

I would have brought him back given the play of carmichael to date,  to bad

[Atomic]

Oh great here comes another sharpshooter @Floyd

[Fatty Liver]

10 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

I would have brought him back given the play of carmichael to date,  to bad

Glad Frederick caught on, like Johnny Adams who he replaced both are good players.

[blue_gold_84]

11 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

I would have brought him back given the play of carmichael to date,  to bad

Frederick plays CB, though. Not HB.

[TrueBlue]

2 hours ago, JCon said:

Scenarios:

One-game suspension and Hill does not appeal.

or

Two-game suspension and Hill does appeal, like the Carter gong show of last season.

 

Which is better for league? What if the CFL didn't think it could win an appeal on a two-game suspension?

Depends on who the CFL wants to think is in control in this situation.  Despite whether or not the CFL thinks it could win an appeal, it should still be trying to set the precedent.  Who is supposed to be in the driver's seat here?

Never base your actions on what you think might happen. Do what's right for the situation, regardless.

ALSO, the Carter incident from last season wasn't the same situation.  Aggressive and threatening behaviour could be argued and even the contact could be looked as somewhat incidental.  Hill's was as blatant as it could be.

[JCon]

2 minutes ago, TrueBlue said:

Depends on who the CFL wants to think is in control in this situation.  Despite whether or not the CFL thinks it could win an appeal, it should still be trying to set the precedent.  Who is supposed to be in the driver's seat here?

Never base your actions on what you think might happen. Do what's right for the situation, regardless.

Okay, and they did that last year but they ended up looking ridiculous after Carter's appeal takes forever and results in a one-game suspension (if I remember right).

I agree with your approach but maybe they feel this is a CBA negotiating thing and that their hands are tied.

[SPuDS]

17 hours ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

I'm not disagreeing with you about the ref should not be touched. 100% absolutely.  

Have we really seen anything done about the bad reffing over the years other then the odd acknowledgement of a bad call? They really have gotten to the point of dictating outcomes.  

oh I agree.. we've seen apologies from the league and I think we have seen crews demoted but nothing of substance but really, what can they do? There isn't a ref tree somewhere that these guys are falling from... the cross-over training from the NFL is helping but recruiting people who want to be refs and are willing to take the punishment and whatnot I believe is failing..  I truly think we need to see the CFL pony up the cash and maybe convince some experienced NCAA refs or even NFL refs if they have the time and desire to, to come down and ref our games.. our home grown solutions are failing miserably and with the command centre being as useless as it is.. we need the best we can get on the field..

[TrueBlue]

1 hour ago, JCon said:

Okay, and they did that last year but they ended up looking ridiculous after Carter's appeal takes forever and results in a one-game suspension (if I remember right).

I agree with your approach but maybe they feel this is a CBA negotiating thing and that their hands are tied.

Ridiculous then?  A lot of people think they look ridiculous now.  This decision is way more black and white than anything I have seen in a long time. 

An appeal will go through arbitration, and if Carters appeal was rejected (which it was) there's no doubt Hill's would be too. 

If the appeal takes a while, it's because of the process with the independent arbitrator and has nothing to do with what the league does or doesn't do.

[mbrg]

2 hours ago, TrueBlue said:

Depends on who the CFL wants to think is in control in this situation.  Despite whether or not the CFL thinks it could win an appeal, it should still be trying to set the precedent.  Who is supposed to be in the driver's seat here?

Never base your actions on what you think might happen. Do what's right for the situation, regardless.

Something like this falls under both the rules and the CBA.  The officials judge based on the rules and issue the penalty, and the commish can add punitive measures that fall within the parameters outlined in the CBA.  I imagine unlike pass interference, the transgressions and the range of punishments available are pretty clear.  Unless there is one more level left for actually punching a ref such as a lifetime ban, I feel safe in saying that everyone, including the commissioner, views this as the most serious transgression and deserving of the maximum punishment.

So if the max punishment allowed under the CBA is 1 game, and I don't know that it is, but it sounds like it is, then wouldn't the CFL and the commish look like idiots if they suspended the player for 4 games?  How would having the brand new commish appear to not understand his own CBA and also appear to be rather incompetent be right for the situation?  And how would putting the league and player thru a legal process that the league is guaranteed to lose be right for the situation?

I imagine the commissioner is fairly dissatisfied with the punishment he is allowed to dish out, hence his statement to change this: "I’m committed to developing a policy in the very near term to improve and codify safety standards to further protect our officials"

It is frustrating that the CFL keeps finding itself in these positions of weakness.  Someone there should have had the foresight to address this long before 2017.

That said, moving to a Roger Goodell police-state like the NFL is has absolutely no appeal to me.

[bearpants]

1 hour ago, mbrg said:

So if the max punishment allowed under the CBA is 1 game, and I don't know that it is, but it sounds like it is, then wouldn't the CFL and the commish look like idiots if they suspended the player for 4 games?  How would having the brand new commish appear to not understand his own CBA and also appear to be rather incompetent be right for the situation?  And how would putting the league and player thru a legal process that the league is guaranteed to lose be right for the situation?

 

I agree with your point... but I'm gonna guess that is not accurate... when that wife-beating POS (I don't remember his name and don't care to) was arrested and subsequently released from Sask last off-season... the CFL basically banned him from re-entering the league... had Sask not released him, would the CFL be powerless to issue some kind of suspension?

[Floyd]

5 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Frederick plays CB, though. Not HB.

You realize that TJ Heath and Bruce Johnson were cornerbacks as well, right?

[mbrg]

17 minutes ago, bearpants said:

I agree with your point... but I'm gonna guess that is not accurate... when that wife-beating POS (I don't remember his name and don't care to) was arrested and subsequently released from Sask last off-season... the CFL basically banned him from re-entering the league... had Sask not released him, would the CFL be powerless to issue some kind of suspension?

They could issue it.  Would it stick if appealed considering he was acquitted?

I don't recall all of the specifics of that one - my memory says the league instructed teams that they should not sign him and if they did the league would not register the contract.  All of the teams were fine with that.

My memory also says that Cox had other legal troubles to deal with beyond that one.  I wonder what would have happened if he had appealed that CFL decree thru the PA?  It might be entirely 50-50 based on the personality of the judge.  He was acquitted of the charge that the CFL used as the basis for that edict.  The lack of an appeal on his part might entirely be because he these other legal issues to deal with.

I suspect the difference between the two would be that contact with a referee is already in the CBA and the penalty for it has been agreed on between the league and the PA, while being a horrible person and wife-beater isn't covered in the CBA, or at least not covered with as specific a penalty as exists for contacting a referee.

That's my guess.  I haven't read the CBA.

[blue_gold_84]

Just now, Floyd said:

You realize that TJ Heath and Bruce Johnson were cornerbacks as well, right?

You realize that not every player is versatile, right? Just because those two played CB and successfully changed to HB, it doesn't necessarily mean Frederick could.

[Atomic]

1 minute ago, blue_gold_84 said:

You realize that not every player is versatile, right? Just because those two played CB and successfully changed to HB, it doesn't necessarily mean Frederick could.

What makes you think he couldn't?

[Floyd]

2 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

You realize that not every player is versatile, right? Just because those two played CB and successfully changed to HB, it doesn't necessarily mean Frederick could.

It appears that Carmichael is having a hard time moving from CB to HB... I agree.

However, it is very common for teams to move guys around in the secondary - so your point about 'he's a cornerback' is kind of moot.

Edited July 12, 2017 by Floyd

[blue_gold_84]

Just now, Atomic said:

What makes you think he couldn't?

I didn't say he couldn't. I don't know. All I said was he played CB during his tenure here and using two others players as examples doesn't prove anything.

[Floyd]

13 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

I didn't say he couldn't. I don't know. All I said was he played CB during his tenure here and using two others players as examples doesn't prove anything.

Three.

Actually, four - looks like Kevin Fogg was a cornerback as well...  maybe we've discovered the problem!

Edited July 12, 2017 by Floyd

[AKAChip]

20 minutes ago, Floyd said:

You realize that TJ Heath and Bruce Johnson were cornerbacks as well, right?

Bruce Johnson was a safety. 

[Floyd]

1 minute ago, AKAChip said:

Bruce Johnson was a safety. 

I'm sure he played some safety as well...  I'll take your word for it.

Anyway, thats basically my point...  some defensive backs can adjust to several positions.  Just because someone is listed at CB doesn't mean you can only play them in that position.

[JuranBoldenRules]

1 hour ago, Floyd said:

Three.

Actually, four - looks like Kevin Fogg was a cornerback as well...  maybe we've discovered the problem!

Maybe you've discovered that there's no such position as defensive halfback in American football.

[Mr Dee]

Out of the Orange

 

[rebusrankin]

Shocking.