Cheap Hit On Stokes....

I just wanted to say that the hit on Stokes was a cheap shot. He deserved to be ejected but like it mattered because they were too far bad to win so that player decided to be cheap a**.

I prey that Wally disiplines him for what he did, cause how could that not be an obvious attempt to injure him.

I didn't get to watch the game but I did listen to it on the radio and I have never heard of the guy who hit Stokes but the announcers were saying he was from the NFL or something so maybe he didn't know the rules. By no means am I saying what he did was right. If he didn't know the rule, the coaches should've informed him.

Actually, what pissed me off about that, is that the same thing happened in the Edm/Tor game, and the player did not get ejected. IMO, the roughing call was a good one...maybe even two roughing calls, but the ejection was over the top.

That was a disgrace not only to the player and the team but to the entire leauge, His only intent on his route was to do that. I don;t prey Wally deals with it. I prey the league suspends his A$$ for pulling that. He wanted to kill Stokes and that is not the point of football. If i was stokes i woulda been all over that guy.

What's the big deal....i can see the no yards, but he had the ball and was TACKLED......i thought it was a clean hit. Stokes was just crying that he was LAID OUT.....i mean this isn't the NFL, we don't have a fair catch rule. Youo have the ball, you get hit

Well when you're getting your asses handed to you by the basement team I guess they would get mad and lay out the little guy, they had nothing else they could really do.

I'm sure this isn't the 1st time STOKES has been hit.....this is football!!! We don't start whinning when DD is laid out ( he's about the same size )

I agree the ejection was a bit much.

I fail to agree with all of you. the point of the 5 yards is to prevent that. The cover man was inside the 5 when stokes caught the ball and had no other intention but to lay him out. Stokes didn;t start crying he got right back up and kept playing. But that was an intentional hit to injure a player. That is total disregard of rules and safety. The player should be fined and suspended

sry no to continue o where i left off. The player purposely broke the rules of the game to injure stokes. Now if none of you can see that then your dumber then a blind mouse. No way can u watch that hit and say there was no intent to injury stokes. But on another note the refs made the perfect call with the disqualification and i hope the league supeneds the player for the hit.

sry now to continue o where i left off. The player purposely broke the rules of the game to injure stokes. Now if none of you can see that then your dumber then a blind mouse. No way can u watch that hit and say there was no intent to injury stokes. But on another note the refs made the perfect call with the disqualification and i hope the league supeneds the player for the hit.

I disagree that Jamal Johnson intended to injure Stokes. He played hard, and just happened to be about 2 secs to early on the hit. If he had hit Stokes two seconds later, this would not even be an issue. This is football, it is a game of controlled violence, and if you don't like it, don't watch it. Stokes' head was down when he got nailed, unlike Levingstons' head, which was still up when he got nailed by the Eskimo on the one play. Did the Eskie get ejected? No, 15 yd penalty, and that was it. Johnson's ejection was WAAAY over the top, and calling for a suspension is beyond stupid.

I saw both games yesterday and their is one huge difference between the two plays. The Play in the EE-TO game the bal lahd hit the ground and the player hit the reciever. I personally believe that the penalty should have been 15 yards, not the 30 that he got. IN the BC game the ball was in the air when the man hit the returner. This is a very dangerous situation to be in for a returner as you have to watch the ball and are very prone, hense the reason for the rule in the first place. I have seen games where the coverage hit the returner in this same type of situation and broke the jaw of the returner (Carlton-Ottawa early 90s), because he was looking up for the ball. I completely agree with throwing the player out of the game.

If the player does not know the rule then he should not be on special teams to begin with.

The CFL does need to stop the flagrent violation of the no yards rule on the bounce. The rule was brought in originally because of the bounce back and players being trapped. They need to go back to that. If the player gets trapped because of the bouncing then make it 5 yards, if they are just waiting at 2 yards for the returner to catch it then it is 15 yards. If the returner is hit while the ball is in the air automatic game ejection plus 25 yards.

thank you at least some1 sees it for the way it is. It was delibrite appemt to injure and direct violation rules. Budha good call.

wot all u people seem to be forgetting is that it happened TWICE in the game. the first time, there were 2 15 yd penalties called, being a bomberfan, i was happy with that eventhough i was kind of scrathcing my head as to y 2 penalties were called, but i guess they took into account that the hit could've have been classified as an intent to injure.

the 2nd time it happened, there was absolutely no holding back, the second he caught the ball, he was pasted! not only that, but he seemed to lead with his helmet, another criteria for attempt to injure. that'a a flagrant violation of the rules, whether u like it or not. if u don't, take it up with the cfl for trying to protect their star players. as for "officersdr", ur an idiot! Stokes never cried, in fact i thought he showed great resolve in holding back! i would've went after the guy for trying to take my head off! kudos to stokes. this is football and i love hard nosed play as much as anyone else, but there are rules to be followed, kick someone's as*, but do it legally!

as for not whining when DD gets hit, whatever. if u had an o line, u'd have 3 healthy qb's. how many times has a d player been flagged for a late hit this year! the rules are there for a reason. i love DD and the way he plays, but becoz he plays all out, that's the chance he takes. he better have a chat w Dunigan, becoz another concussion or 2 and he might be thru.

as for the ejection, i think it may have been a bit much, but when u consider that it happened twice and it was late in the game, i think the refs were just trying to "nip" things in the bud before all hell broke loose and i commend them for that.

as for Wally, i have a lot of respect for him, but u have to wonder whether that was part of the game plan to get under stokes' skin, if it was, that's pathetic, kind of like the lions performance on turkey day!

i guess "unrealriders" said it best - "Well when you're getting your asses handed to you by the basement team I guess they would get mad and lay out the little guy, they had nothing else they could really do." LOL LOL

BC SUCKS!!!

I agree, nobody seems to care about the penalty for being within the 5 yards anymore. It seems like a coach would rather take the penalty and not give up a big return instead of risking the returner getting by his cover team. If the penalty yardage was increased, then it wouldn't be such a good trade-off, as most of the time a returner gets 10-ish yards on the returns.

OK i didn't mean STOKES was whinning i meant bomber fans were whinning.... he had posession of the ball. granted he was in the 5 yards but what's with the ejection?? it was a 15 yard penalty....Look at the VERY LATE hit on Peirce by Joe Flemming. Piece had thrown the ball 2-3 seconds before he was hit. Flemming was on the ground, got up and hit Peirce....and that was only a roughing the passer call.

OH, and for Shank868.........YOU'RE MOM

there is no way wally wants his players attempting to injure someone. hit them hard and clean. definently but not cheap stuff.

It was a cheap hit. He deserved to get turffed. I have to agree with Budha, it was a dangerous play, and the hit was totally unnecessary. Check out the ask the ref section today. I think it is explained well.

That ejection was big-time BS! I'm a 'peg fan and, yes, a penalty for no-yards was a no-brainer. But an ejection? And for rough play?! no fine should be levied because that call was garbage.

ps: Support your CFL officials, but bad calls are bad calls.