3 stars and hh bluer than blue

[ddanger]

I might walk back my earlier comments a little bit, but it's sure easy to look at slow motion and make or unmake a penalty call. I don't like that part at all. Let the refs do their thing. The command centre is far too involved IMO.

3 stars:  Miller for the record; Jackson; Willy.  HH: Hansen for his special teams work.

I think this game exposed some weaknesses. We had to know that they were going to come hard on D, and they did. We didn't adjust for that. I like it when we go heavy on the o'line. 

I think they're trying to shelter Leggs by having him punt and do kick-offs, but Crapinga needed to make those 2 field goals, not only for the team, but to save his job. I don't think he survives many more misses. Leggs is our future kicker, as long as he gets some solid mentoring. Westwood??

MIller #25 has got to go. 

[Stickem]

IF that hit by Alexander was a penalty then this game has degraded to touch football ...Nothing wrong with touch football BUT fans aren't paying to see touch football....I've seen more hard hits than that one delivered by Alexander that were seen as just part of the game.... for ex.one on Collaros in that game when our O guy missed a block....Just utter nonsense and a slippery slope that will end up reducing this game to a sham....The league better do a reassessment if they're going to call clean hard hitting a penalty....The stands are empty now (case in point T.O.) BUT wait it could get worse 

[TrueBlue4ever]

45 minutes ago, blue85gold said:

Anyone have a clip of the Alexander hit? Missed the second half and haven't seen it anywhere.

I posted it above but here it is again. Go to the 43 second mark in the video highlights.  
 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/cfl/argos-beat-blue-bombers-first-game-back-bmo-field-nearly-two-years/

[blue85gold]

6 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I posted it above but here it is again. Go to the 43 second mark in the video highlights.  
 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/cfl/argos-beat-blue-bombers-first-game-back-bmo-field-nearly-two-years/

Thanks! Hit was much tamer than I thought it would be. 

[TrueBlue4ever]

Just now, blue85gold said:

Thanks! Hit was much tamer than I thought it would be. 

The slow mo certainly highlights the head contact, inadvertent as it may have been. Not a dirty hit, but dangerous in that the receiver was engaged with another defender and Alexander had a free shot at him with the ball out of play. Whether that SHOULD be considered just a tough hit or a penalty in the fan’s eyes is up for debate (as we have seen) but the league certainly is skewing that way with their rules’ alterations in the last few years. 

[JuranBoldenRules]

32 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

The slow mo certainly highlights the head contact, inadvertent as it may have been. Not a dirty hit, but dangerous in that the receiver was engaged with another defender and Alexander had a free shot at him with the ball out of play. Whether that SHOULD be considered just a tough hit or a penalty in the fan’s eyes is up for debate (as we have seen) but the league certainly is skewing that way with their rules’ alterations in the last few years. 

The DB in trail position has no bearing on whether the hit is clean or dirty.  The hit is not late, which is what might bring that issue into play, say a guy is already under wraps and someone comes in late to belt him.  Being "engaged" with another player is not a factor in the open field, defenders are still encouraged to rally to the ball and finish tackles, whether that's 1, 2 or 6 defenders.

[M.Silverback]

52 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

The slow mo certainly highlights the head contact, inadvertent as it may have been. Not a dirty hit, but dangerous in that the receiver was engaged with another defender and Alexander had a free shot at him with the ball out of play. Whether that SHOULD be considered just a tough hit or a penalty in the fan’s eyes is up for debate (as we have seen) but the league certainly is skewing that way with their rules’ alterations in the last few years. 

That's the key point - it was penalized because it was a dangerous hit. Not necessarily dirty. Dirty implies that it was pre-meditated, which it certainly didn't look like. It was a split second decision, with a vulnerable player coming across the middle. Dirty is also harder to assess, as it's based on trying to guess what was going through a player's mind, and their reputation (Jets fans, remember the Scheifele hit debate? To me dangerous, not dirty - still worthy of suspension). Dangerous is easy to assess - you hit someone in the head hard enough to knock them unconscious and remove their helmet, it's a dangerous hit. And, like it or not, those are not allowed. Period. Player safety, which overall is a good thing. No debate. Penalty. Maybe a fine. 

[TBURGESS]

It was premeditated. It was dangerous. It was dirty. It was penalized. I suspect that Alexander will be fined this week.

[Stickem]

32 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

It was premeditated. It was dangerous. It was dirty. It was penalized. I suspect that Alexander will be fined this week.

Bull$hit......I don't expect any fine BUT if that happens there better be fines issued in every game played for playing the game the way players are taught....to hit and hit hard...

[M.Silverback]

28 minutes ago, Stickem said:

Bull$hit......I don't expect any fine BUT if that happens there better be fines issued in every game played for playing the game the way players are taught....to hit and hit hard...

I'm not 100% convinced it was premeditated, but I'm 100% convinced it was dangerous, enough to knock a player out of a game. That's a penalty, and maybe a fine. 

I coach youth, high school. Son plays USports football. Players are taught to be aggressive, strong tacklers. Not to take head shots. First, because it's dangerous to the player being hit, and often the hitter. Second, no coach wants a bunch of 15 yard penalties, or worse a player being suspended. Teams that get a lot of those type of penalties are poorly coached.

Actually, you try to teach players the technique in the Seahawks video - strong, aggressive, wrap up tackles. Not this dive at the knees, or lining up a player with some kind of big shoulder hockey-body-check bull$hit tackles. Those are ineffective. And if you try it on Derrick Henry, he's running right over you. Wrap up, take the player to the ground. Watch some high end rugby. 

[Starman115]

14 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

What I believe SHOULD be called is not relevant to my point. Was the hit dirty? No. Did he mean to hit the receiver hard? Sure looks like it (in fact after the game he said he’s going to hit as hard as he can). Did he have any intention of playing the ball? No. Was it violent? Yep. Was the receiver in a vulnerable spot? Absolutely (Alexander’s teammate had his arms wrapped up). Did the force of the hit knock off his helmet and render him unconscious? Yes on both counts. All that adds up to a dangerous situation which by today’s rules is a penalty. So if you want to say it’s BS that this kind of hit which used to be seen as good clean rough football is now a penalty in a softer game, then we can have that debate (Darryl Stingley may come down on the side of wishing that it was a penalty in past years). But to say it’s a BS penalty and that the refs screwed the Bombers is wrong in my books. Hate on the rule of you want, but the rule was enforced properly by the refs in this case IMO. If you want my personal opinion on stuff like this, I will look at a hit out of bounds or a roughing the QB and there are times when I think “boy that was a marginal penalty” bit I can at the same time understand why the call is being made. And there are times when I think it’s too marginal and the refs are calling it too tight. When I saw the hit the fist time I thought “wow, he really lit him up, that was kind of dangerous”, but I did not label it as dirty. Watching the slow mo replay and seeing the head contact, I still did not think it was dirty but thought “yeah, I can understand why that would be a penalty, especially to keep the game from spiralling into a state of retribution” 

I appreciate your taking the time to elaborate on the play, and also for a previous post explaining the rule regarding reviewing plays after an injury as I wasn't sure how that worked.

Just to be clear, I want to say that I think the Bombers played quite poorly for the most part and need to play much better if they expect to win. Also, I don't believe the officials had any bias against the Bombers, or were trying to screw them over. I base my opinion of the hit on my understanding of the CFL rules.

I remember the rules being changed many years ago to protect QBs, whereby hits below the knee and above the shoulders became illegal. I also remember the rules being changed that banned helmet to helmet contact by defenders. I don't recall hearing about rule changes regarding shoulder hits to receivers in vulnerable positions. I'd be curious to know when this rule was changed and where in the rule book it exists, since the hit looked perfectly legal to me, and also to every ref on the field.

As for being a dangerous play, I'd agree 100%. A play like that shouldn't have been called in the huddle and that ball sure the hell shouldn't have been thrown due to the danger it placed the receiver in. To single out Alexander as being solely responsible (for hitting hard the way he's been taught to) seemed highly unfair. I believe the penalty call was made entirely due to the nature of the injury.

I noticed that Duane Forde hummed and hawed while awaiting the decision from the command center, then agreed with the call after it was made by the command centre. I almost wish (for this one and only time) that Glen Suitor had been the color man for this game. I'm positive that as a player he would have made that same hit 10 times out of 10. Perhaps he could have better explained about any CFL rule changes made regarding shoulder pad hits on receivers.

[JCon]

4 minutes ago, Starman115 said:

I appreciate your taking the time to elaborate on the play, and also for a previous post explaining the rule regarding reviewing plays after an injury as I wasn't sure how that worked.

Just to be clear, I want to say that I think the Bombers played quite poorly for the most part and need to play much better if they expect to win. Also, I don't believe the officials had any bias against the Bombers, or were trying to screw them over. I base my opinion of the hit on my understanding of the CFL rules.

I remember the rules being changed many years ago to protect QBs, whereby hits below the knee and above the shoulders became illegal. I also remember the rules being changed that banned helmet to helmet contact by defenders. I don't recall hearing about rule changes regarding shoulder hits to receivers in vulnerable positions. I'd be curious to know when this rule was changed and where in the rule book it exists, since the hit looked perfectly legal to me, and also to every ref on the field.

As for being a dangerous play, I'd agree 100%. A play like that shouldn't have been called in the huddle and that ball sure the hell shouldn't have been thrown due to the danger it placed the receiver in. To single out Alexander as being solely responsible (for hitting hard the way he's been taught to) seemed highly unfair. I believe the penalty call was made entirely due to the nature of the injury.

I noticed that Duane Forde hummed and hawed while awaiting the decision from the command center, then agreed with the call after it was made by the command centre. I almost wish (for this one and only time) that Glen Suitor had been the color man for this game. I'm positive that as a player he would have made that same hit 10 times out of 10. Perhaps he could have better explained about any CFL rule changes made regarding shoulder pad hits on receivers.

[Stickem]

1 hour ago, M.Silverback said:

I'm not 100% convinced it was premeditated, but I'm 100% convinced it was dangerous, enough to knock a player out of a game. That's a penalty, and maybe a fine. 

 

Well now you opened up another kettle of fish...Where do you start drawing the lines, that this was an intentional attempt to injure, or just a hard hitting football play.....Many players have been put out of a game because of a hard hit...Do you start throwing fines at every player who made a tackle and the recipient had to leave the field.....That's just nonsense and not the game of football I want to watch...

[Goalie]

3 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

It was premeditated. It was dangerous. It was dirty. It was penalized. I suspect that Alexander will be fined this week.

You been waiting 2 years for this haven't you. Like a pig in **** right now 

[SpeedFlex27]

A play like that last maybe 5 seconds tops from the  snap of the ball. Defense doesn't know where the ball is going & you call it premeditated? What is Alexander, a serial killer as well? A hit man for the Mafia? Give your head a shake. All you do is ***** & complain. 

Edited August 23, 2021 by SpeedFlex27

[do or die]

Special teams used to be viewed as a team strength.   With this current K and KR......hardly.

[TrueBlue4ever]

1 hour ago, Starman115 said:

I appreciate your taking the time to elaborate on the play, and also for a previous post explaining the rule regarding reviewing plays after an injury as I wasn't sure how that worked.

Just to be clear, I want to say that I think the Bombers played quite poorly for the most part and need to play much better if they expect to win. Also, I don't believe the officials had any bias against the Bombers, or were trying to screw them over. I base my opinion of the hit on my understanding of the CFL rules.

I remember the rules being changed many years ago to protect QBs, whereby hits below the knee and above the shoulders became illegal. I also remember the rules being changed that banned helmet to helmet contact by defenders. I don't recall hearing about rule changes regarding shoulder hits to receivers in vulnerable positions. I'd be curious to know when this rule was changed and where in the rule book it exists, since the hit looked perfectly legal to me, and also to every ref on the field.

As for being a dangerous play, I'd agree 100%. A play like that shouldn't have been called in the huddle and that ball sure the hell shouldn't have been thrown due to the danger it placed the receiver in. To single out Alexander as being solely responsible (for hitting hard the way he's been taught to) seemed highly unfair. I believe the penalty call was made entirely due to the nature of the injury.

I noticed that Duane Forde hummed and hawed while awaiting the decision from the command center, then agreed with the call after it was made by the command centre. I almost wish (for this one and only time) that Glen Suitor had been the color man for this game. I'm positive that as a player he would have made that same hit 10 times out of 10. Perhaps he could have better explained about any CFL rule changes made regarding shoulder pad hits on receivers.

Thanks for the input. I think the rule change came with the expansion of the review procedure in 2019 (I listed the clause in an earlier post). Not sure it was directly focussed on head shots and changing that standard of review, but I think the idea was that if an injury occurred where the injury spotter could step in and remove a player from the game (concussion protocol being the most common reason) then they were allowed to review the play to determine if the injury occurred as a result of an illegal play. wbbfan is right in that it becomes a reactionary call in light of the injury since it allows for fresh review, but I don’t think it goes so far as to “create” a non-existent penalty to compensate for injury as a make-up call. It absolutely creates an opportunity for review where one did not exist, so it may be a matter of splitting hairs between “a chance to get it right upon re-examination” and “penalizing a player for an injury that came about on a legal play”.  I can certainly see the perception of the latter, however. 
 

As for Suitor, he did make a comment in the later Rider game after a roughing the QB call that the new rules in place to protect players made these calls more common, and that “some think the pendulum has swung too far in favour of protecting at all costs” without explicitly putting himself in one camp or the other. 
 

As for where we may be headed, it would not surprise me to see some sort of flag football applications to QBs for sacks at some point in my lifetime. Given the size of defensive players, QBs standing still on many plays just waiting to get hit, and the Increased knowledge of CTE and how prevalent it is and how it could affect liability to the league, further protections, not less, are the most logical course in the future. The NFL has made rules to pretty much make kickoff returns a non-entity and eliminate those big hits on cover teams. The “bust the wedge” hit is now gone as you cannot line up more than 2 blockers together on a return. And as admirable as it was to see a player launch himself into a wall and sacrifice his body, the sad reality of players committing suicide in their 40’s and 50’s after being driven insane from repeated brain trauma was a big wake-up call and made many look at those plays in a new light. That’s the climate we live in now. 
 

[M.Silverback]

1 hour ago, Stickem said:

..Do you start throwing fines at every player who made a tackle and the recipient had to leave the field.....That's just nonsense and not the game of football I want to watch...

No. Just for dangerous head shots that put a player out. Like this one was. And I too love the contact and physicality of football. And players get injured all the time in the course of the game. If Derrick Henry runs over a DB trying to make a legit tackle and that DB gets a concussion, that’s football.

But I’m glad the Jack Tatum head hunting type plays have decreased. Watching old NFL footage of dangerous mostly intentional head shots makes me cringe now. 

[M.Silverback]

37 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

A play like that last maybe 5 seconds tops from the  snap of the ball. Defense doesn't know where the ball is going & you call it premeditated? What is Alexander, a serial killer as well? A hit man for the Mafia? Give your head a shake. All you do is ***** & complain. 

I keep quibbling over “intentional”. This wasn’t Sean Payton bounty gate I’ll pay players to put someone out intentional or premeditated. It was a split second decision like said, from a player who plays the right way.
 

But it was also a “dangerous” decision. If you’ve played, you know he could have let up. He’s was going for the big pop, and unfortunately caught a WR in the head. Scheifele did in the Jets playoffs. Different sport, but same “bad” decision in a split second. 

Like it or not, dangerous head shot equals penalty minimum, possible fine. 

[SpeedFlex27]

1 minute ago, M.Silverback said:

I keep quibbling over “intentional”. This wasn’t Sean Payton bounty gate I’ll pay players to put someone out intentional or premeditated. It was a split second decision like said, from a player who plays the right way.
 

But it was also a “dangerous” decision. If you’ve played, you know he could have let up. He’s was going for the big pop, and unfortunately caught a WR in the head. Scheifele did in the Jets playoffs. Different sport, but same “bad” decision in a split second. 

Like it or not, dangerous head shot equals penalty minimum, possible fine. 

Not saying it wasn't dangerous. As I said previously on this thread that any shot high near the head will get flagged. Refs have to call it. However for it to be called premeditated is ridiculous. 

[wbbfan]

19 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

Taylor Loffler got flagged in BC for that same kind of high head shot on a receiver in the end zone in 2016 or 2017, so yes they have flagged it before. And no one can possibly know if they won’t keep it up. If you have that kind of clairvoyance, I’d like this week’s lottery numbers please. Seriously though, the refs have been throwing a lot of laundry this year - I sense  there is a crackdown happening, and this play may just be a part of it. 

I keep hearing how these hits have happened all the time and aren’t called. Someone please identify another hit where the secondary defender has come in while the receiver is engaged with the primary defender, the offensive player is not the ball carrier and in fact never came in contact with the ball, the blow was to the head with the shoulder pad, the defensive player was targeting the player completely with no regard to playing the ball, the force of the blow was enough to knock the helmet off, AND the receiver was rendered unconscious. All of those factors were at play here. Please name the last hit you saw with those same circumstances in the past few years, much less games. Like I said, the Taylor Loffler hit is an example I can think of of a similar violent hit across the middle with the intent of blowing up the receiver. 

What I believe SHOULD be called is not relevant to my point. Was the hit dirty? No. Did he mean to hit the receiver hard? Sure looks like it (in fact after the game he said he’s going to hit as hard as he can). Did he have any intention of playing the ball? No. Was it violent? Yep. Was the receiver in a vulnerable spot? Absolutely (Alexander’s teammate had his arms wrapped up). Did the force of the hit knock off his helmet and render him unconscious? Yes on both counts. All that adds up to a dangerous situation which by today’s rules is a penalty. So if you want to say it’s BS that this kind of hit which used to be seen as good clean rough football is now a penalty in a softer game, then we can have that debate (Darryl Stingley may come down on the side of wishing that it was a penalty in past years). But to say it’s a BS penalty and that the refs screwed the Bombers is wrong in my books. Hate on the rule of you want, but the rule was enforced properly by the refs in this case IMO. If you want my personal opinion on stuff like this, I will look at a hit out of bounds or a roughing the QB and there are times when I think “boy that was a marginal penalty” bit I can at the same time understand why the call is being made. And there are times when I think it’s too marginal and the refs are calling it too tight. When I saw the hit the fist time I thought “wow, he really lit him up, that was kind of dangerous”, but I did not label it as dirty. Watching the slow mo replay and seeing the head contact, I still did not think it was dirty but thought “yeah, I can understand why that would be a penalty, especially to keep the game from spiralling into a state of retribution” 

In response to the first bold part, that is absolutely the expectation of every player where the QB is involved, so hardly dumb. As soon as the QB releases the ball (not a half second) the defensive player is required to let up and not drive through the tackle. And players know now that this is the rule (like it or not) and have adjusted, and so it is definitely humanly possible. And that expectation now carries on to receivers not to throw blind side blocks back towards the line of scrimmage on defensive backs who are in chase position on other receivers who have the ball, and to safeties looking to tee off on a defenceless receiver. And players have adjusted. 
 

To answer bold part #2, Taylor Loffler comes immediately to mind, as mentioned before. Can you name a hit over the middle on a receiver without the ball that knocked them out that wasn’t called in recent memory (after the automatic review rule change)? Don’t know which Fajardo hit you are referring to, but I’m guessing he had the ball in his hands and was running downfield. 
 

The video of the hit is here for people to judge how far away the ball was, where the contact was, and how defenceless the receiver was. Again, hate the rule if you want, but not the ruling.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/cfl/argos-beat-blue-bombers-first-game-back-bmo-field-nearly-two-years/

And for all saying “if it was a Bomber I’d have the same reaction” I remember the screaming when Keith Stokes got clotheslined (across the upper chest, not the neck) on a punt return near his goal line against Hamilton and fumbled away the winning score and the outrage over no penalty call where he got knocked out, so I don’t buy it when you now say “I’d be fine with it”. But it’s a silly question to begin with since we all will deny having a bias for our own team to not look hypocritical when or course we do. 

Lofflers hit was late. Not even close to this situation. Literally every Loffler hit was at best this clean. Every hit he laid would've had to be punished. 

First the guy wasn't engaged second it happened in the same game that bighill smashed a wr on a screen pass attempt while engaged. 

It is dumb. It's the type of stuff people whove never played at any level can only believe. You can not stop or change direction in a half second on a 30 yard sprint. It's hilarious to claim other wise. 

I named one in the same game so yeah. A good chunk of hard hits over the middle are on guys with out the ball. Montreal in their first game had a play like that. 

 

8 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

The slow mo certainly highlights the head contact, inadvertent as it may have been. Not a dirty hit, but dangerous in that the receiver was engaged with another defender and Alexander had a free shot at him with the ball out of play. Whether that SHOULD be considered just a tough hit or a penalty in the fan’s eyes is up for debate (as we have seen) but the league certainly is skewing that way with their rules’ alterations in the last few years. 

Having to go to slow motion to see it alone make the window too small to humanly do other wise. Real life doesn't go in slow motion. Refs also don't make calls in slow motion. 

6 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

It was premeditated. It was dangerous. It was dirty. It was penalized. I suspect that Alexander will be fined this week.

Based on what exactly? Oh nothing but the same old dull contrarion garbage as usual. Ok. 

Edited August 23, 2021 by wbbfan

[TBURGESS]

3 hours ago, Goalie said:

You been waiting 2 years for this haven't you. Like a pig in **** right now 

You think I've been somehow waiting for 2 years for a specific play just so I can say it's a penalty? Wow, what a maroon!

It was premeditated because he targeted the receiver without knowing where the ball was. He was 100% going for the kill shot. If the ball wasn't past the receiver or the receiver had his hand on the ball, then it's a good play to remove the player from the ball, but that's not what happened.

It was dangerous and dirty because he lowered the boom on an unprotected player, knocking him out.

The whining about my negativity always starts when positrons know I'm right.

[TrueBlue4ever]

2 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Lofflers hit was late. Not even close to this situation. Literally every Loffler hit was at best this clean. Every hit he laid would've had to be punished. 

First the guy wasn't engaged second it happened in the same game that bighill smashed a wr on a screen pass attempt while engaged. 

It is dumb. It's the type of stuff people whove never played at any level can only believe. You can not stop or change direction in a half second on a 30 yard sprint. It's hilarious to claim other wise. 

I named one in the same game so yeah. A good chunk of hard hits over the middle are on guys with out the ball. Montreal in their first game had a play like that. 

 

Having to go to slow motion to see it alone make the window too small to humanly do other wise. Real life doesn't go in slow motion. Refs also don't make calls in slow motion. 

Based on what exactly? Oh nothing but the same old dull contration garbage as usual. Ok. 

Here’s Loffler’s hit for comparison. Go to the 1:46:25 mark. 
 

I’ll let others decide, but to my mind saying that hit was late compared to Alexander’s and not even close to this situation is just not accurate. Same defenceless receiver (who in Loffler’s case got his hands on a playable ball) same head contact, penalty gets called. And Glen Suitor plainly says “in today’s game that’s going to be called”. 
 

As for the insults and “if you never played the game you are dumb”, not going to even bother dignifying that with a response. 

[Starman115]

The Loffler’s hit seen above is a helmet to helmet hit and a nasty one at that. IMO that's not only a penalty but a dirty hit too.

[Mark F]

20 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

Taylor Loffler got flagged in BC for that same kind of high head shot on a receiver

no, he was flagged for having a mullet.