TrueBlue4ever

Because according to some the rest of our corps is so elite that he needs to be as perfect as them.

I found the assessment of the current Bomber receiving corps a little over the top.

When the ball goes over Daniels’ head he is at the Toronto 51 and Alexander is at the Toronto 54. When first contact is made by Alexander at Toronto’s 52, the ball hits the ground at the Winnipeg 52, so…….6 yards?

I thought you said Darvin Lawler Demski and Woli were as good a foursome as there is out there. Why then being in Duke?

Don’t forget the part about the refs always screwing us over.

Ok, if you want thoughtful debate, we are till awaiting your list of extreme left stances. So far, you have ID’d 2 groups (BLM and ANTIFA) but not elaborated how their stances are extreme (there have been extreme actions by a very few members, but I would question if that then makes the entire movement extreme, or their stance extreme). Other than that or suppessing free speech on University campuses (which others debate as hate speech) all you have come back with is “surely you jest if you are so biased as to not see the extreme leftism which is strongly present at this time. And your failure to admit this makes you part of the problem”. That’s not debate, so you are engaging in the same behaviour you just decried. So once again, provide a list of extreme left wing positions so we can have that thoughtful debate you want.

That database is good to May of 2020, so it does not include the killing of right-wing activist Aaron “Jay” Danielson by self -proclaimed ANTIFA member Michael Reinhoel. And it also does not include the Kyle Rittenhouse killing of two BLM protesters. Both of those incidents were in August 2020. So 331-1 actually.

To be fair, ANTIFA has had tons of military members. They fought the Nazis in WW2.

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.

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.

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.

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/

And is that on him or the personnel he has at his disposal this year?

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.

Was the question “Can you name one of the 8 offensive coordinators who did not win a Grey Cup in 2019?”

That type of hit is not acceptable in today’s game. If you look at the standard of roughing the passer today vs 10 or 20 years ago, we are approaching flag football status with them. And as for the dozens of hits like that, you rarely see a player knocked out from a hit. Wbbfan says Alexander got penalized for hitting too hard and he is bang on - but that is defined as a penalty these days, and rightly so given the concerns about concussions in football and possible liability for the league. I hear the critics saying “so players aren’t supposed to hit anymore?” and the answer is sliding towards “no they’re not, not like that”. League wants tackles and not kill shots, and have put rules in place like the no crack back block or blind side receiver block back towards the line of scrimmage or injury spotters review to keep this predatory hit out of the game. B*tch about football getting soft all you want, but don’t say it’s not a penalty. It wasn’t years ago, but it is now. And let’s get over the “They’re out to screw the Bombers with those calls” paranoia. The Toronto DB who got called for the late hit out of bounds was a pretty marginal penalty as well from a toughness or dirty play standpoint, but in today’s protective league it’s going to get called.

Sorry, was just responding to the prior post.

41 people (myself included) picked Saskatchewan, so these results are wrong. I should have 5 wins overall. Calgary and Edmonton alone have given me 6 of my 7 losses.

The injury time out allows the booth to review and determine if the injury was a result of a missed call. If no injury, then no penalty, but not because the penalty did not happen, but rather because without injury there is no opportunity for review. The injury review won’t always lead automatically to a penalty. Players get injured in game all the time without a penalty being tacked on, and yes the rule specifically requires the injury spotter to stop the game and demand removal of the player from the game, so it is clearly addressing concussion protocol, so it is geared towards removing that type of play from the game. The league wants that type of play removed, so they are going to call it. But if he wasn’t hurt, it doesn’t mean an infraction did not occur, just that it was missed by the refs and not reviewable. They aren’t deciding “well he was hurt so we have to now invent a penalty where there was none”. As for suspensions based on result, welcome to discipline review in all sports.

Unclear what you mean here. That if it was a different player they would not have called the penalty?

And based on the rule book they are completely entitled to do that, so the league DID make the choice. (section italicized). And the on-field refs explained it that way on the mike too. I mean, Daniels was injured and spent the remainder of the game in concussion protocol, so he wasn’t faking. RULE 10 — REPLAY SECTION 3 — COMMAND CENTRE REVIEWS Article 1 – Automatic Reviews The Command Centre will automatically review the following situations: Scoring and potential scoring plays Roughing the Passer called and non-called Grade 2 Roughing the Passer Roughing/Contacting the Kicker called and non-called Grade 2 Spearing Plays where a turnover is ruled to have occurred as a result of a fumble lost or an interception Called penalties that are not coach challengeable penalties Called line of scrimmage fouls to ensure the correct penalty is applied Major Fouls that occur after the play is over Called Illegal Contact and Defensive Pass Interference fouls to ensure the correct penalty application not whether or not the penalty occurred Where a penalty should be applied from Whether the clock is showing the correct time Where officials disagree or are uncertain on how to rule in a play situation Spotting of the ball only to correct egregious errors Plays when the Injury Spotter stops the game to remove an injured player to determine if the injury was caused by an uncalled penalty

I don’t think the ball was 5 yards away, and I don’t think he aimed for the head. The “head shot” was the receiver falling down and catching a forearm to the chest/neck which snapped his head. If a player’s knee hits the opponent’s chin as he falls to the turf, does that make it a “head shot” simply because the head was contacted? I will say that it was a predatory hit in that he was completely focussed on hitting the receiver and not on playing the ball. That in itself should be fine if you want to separate the player from the ball, but he saw the chance to light up a defenceless player with the strongest most violent legal hit he could deliver and he took it. If that is the kind of hit the league wants out of the game (and based on the rule last year preventing receivers from throwing blindside blocks on DBs back towards the line of scrimmage, apparently they do) then it is a penalty.

That’s 2 weeks in a row Fajardo has screwed me out of a short Powell TD run near the goal line with a QB keeper.

Let’s not panic, but let’s change one quarter of the starting personnel.

Perspective missing After Blue loss. Things to fix But not “exposed” yet Arbuckle solid Argo lines dominate Blue Money CAN buy wins. Ott. D bend don’t break But unless O starts scoring Losses will pile up Riders on a roll Penalties notwithstanding Sask. clear number one