Command Centre "robs Ti Cats again"

Correct me if I am wrong my fellow Ti Cat fans...
But if you "lead" with your helmet" into a QB.
Is that NOT roughing the passer ?
Willis did lead with his helmet into call from the field, so Kent makes
a challenge and the Command Centre penalty.
Are they right ?
Or has yet "again" does this only show the people working the Command Centre
are total "blind fools" and should be fired.
Along with Glen Johnson...
Interested what you have to say.
As I believe this was another "no call" that changed the outcome of a game.
And as we all know...this was a

Replay refs don't have to know the rules, apparently. Earlier this year the wrong call was made by the replay ref with the catch and fumble, and later the CFL admitted the replay official didn't know the rules.

So, maybe this replay ref doesn't know the rules either. The hit was late and the defender did NOT let up, and gave it extra. So, according to the rules that's RTP.

So the replay ref doesn't know the rules.

I believe that's the same crew that jobbed the cats last time.

Show me where the CFL stated that one of their officials didn't know the rules.

The CFL said that the replay ref made the wrong call on the catch and fumble in the Ottawa game. The replay ref can watch the play in slow motion as often as he needs to.
Therefore, he saw the play like everyone else did. Therefore, he made the wrong call for one of two reasons;

  1. He is dishonest
  2. He didn't know the rules

There is no other explanation. If it were a judgement call, then the CFL would have said the replay official saw it differently. They didn't say that. They said he was wrong.

Not sure it was late, it wasn't high, and I don't think the defender led with his helmet. The most that can be said is that the defender did not let up. But did he have time to?

I'm thinking it was a clean hit.

Look at the photos posted on the other thread, and is sure looks late, and he didn't try to let up

Coach Sal commented when the announcement was made on the field (No RTP) that he couldn't believe the decision from the CC. He felt the challenge should have been upheld - as did PxP man Marshall Ferguson.

Sure it wasn't late.
It sure wasn't too high.
And contact by the tacklers helmet surely wasn't made first.

When the QB is running north south at the line of scrimmage, with his Oline behind him and with open field in front of him, the defense can be expected to hit him hard enough to stop him in his tracks from advancing. Why should a QB be given a free pass to continue to run and gain any yards? Maybe if Collaras was not in forward motion when the tackler arrived with speed... maybe I see it differently.

Hamiltons QB's are going to remain at heightened peril of legal hard tackling as long as the teams run game remains almost nonexistant

It wasn't a penalty in any way shape or form. And I say this as a rabid Edmonton hater. Hamilton fans are clutching at straws I'm afraid. The 'Cats lost this particular game because their kicker isn't reliable, they couldn't stop the run, and Collaros hasn't regained his pre knee injury form.

I agree with everything except it was definitely a penalty. It was late and he didn't let up a bit.
That's a penalty.
Maybe it shouldn't be a penalty, but according to the rules and the way it's been interpreted all year, it was a clear penalty.

It wasn’t late, it wasn’t high, and he shouldn’t let up when the QB is moving forwards where he may end up running for the first down if he pulls the ball down. Correct non-call on the field that was correctly upheld by the CC.

I just watched it again, and I'm leaning to it being roughing the passer.

Willis had his head up as he ran toward Collaros, looking right at him. Collaros threw the ball, and then faded back (OK, cringed). Willis then lowered his head and drove his shoulder into Collaros.

Basically, from what I saw, Willis would definitely have seen the ball leave Collaros's hand before lowering his head and going for the hit. That, to me, was an unnecessarily rough hit on the passer after he had released the ball. Violation of clause (a), and possibly (d).

(a) Contacting the passer in an unnecessary manner, including stuffing him to the ground, violently throwing him to the ground, and landing on him with most of the defender’s weight, (d) Attacking the passer who, after releasing the ball, is either standing still or fading backwards and is obviously out of the play and remains out of the play,

Did you see the photos posted on the other string by Grover? Look at those and you might change your mind. The ball is gone and the Edmonton player isn't even in sight yet. Then he hits him and doesn't even let up.
Clear cut RTP every time.

Exactly. Not only was it late, but he gave it a little extra on top of it. Clear cut penalty every time.
Well, I guess I should say every "other" time....

The hit was a clean hit, shoulder to shoulder but it was a late hit.

Collaros was moving forward as if to run, which probably influenced the ref’s decision. I think if it had been called on the field, it would not have been challenged by Edmonton or reversed by the command centre.

We just got the wrong end of a judgement call on the field. Did anybody see the holding call on the same play? That’s another judgement call that went against us, and wiped out a first down.

Here is that still photo, notice that Willis is not yet in the picture before the late hit
Pic was posted by TSN's Derek Taylor

Collaros is inside the tackle box and behind the line of scrimmage.

[url=] ... r%5Eauthor[/url]

He didn't run up field he threw the ball and was hit late

One of the Ticat linemen held his block a split second too long as Collaros slipped through the line. May have prevented him from making the tackle.

Incorrect call. The CFL does absolutely nothing to protect quarterbacks. Bush league non call. Thats what kills our game and our league, the idiots in straps.