How about that hit on Printers

by Browner and where the hell were the Ref's. That was a deliberate attempt to cause a head injury to Printers and no flag. There have been far to many of these types of injuries and its time the league stepped up and stop head first tackles. I hope Wally sends that tape to the CFL head office.

Totally agreed.

I did not see the game, it was way too late in my time zone, but I did watch the highlights on this morning and then searched the threads expecting to see something about Browner being penalized or ejected for his obvious leading with his head to Printers' head. . . and saw nothing.

yeah that was a ferocious hit. give casey credit for hopping up to take a round out of him if not corraled by his friends. when its that flagrant and on the late side it sure should have been flagged. what is this - football?
that browner is a load. we'll take his number - you can count on that.

browner hit in shoulder to shoulder. Nothing wrong with that hit. Where do you learn this mind reading thing that allows you to know the intent of the player. Maybe the refs need to learn this??

Not sure what I missed...I though Browners hit was all right.

Well it sure looked like a helmet to helmet hit to me . . .

From where we were sitting I thought the hit was legit. No doubt the guy who hit Printers was foaming at the bit and saw it as open season. I'm pretty sure he was determined to make sure Printers thought twice about running with the ball next time.

I assume then you must have been there instead of watching on the tube??

You assume incorrectly. . . read my first post in this thread, which is the second post in this thread. . . I clearly stated that I did not see the game. I've only seen the replay on . . and from that it looked to me like a helmet to helmet hit. . .

Just looked at it again. . . the play starts at 2:40. . . sure looks to me like Browner lauches himself at Printers, and it's a helmet to helmet hit.

Any objective fan watching the replays could tell it wasnt even close to being helmet to helmet

all part of the game baby... .he got a good hit by the Calgary D.... nothing dirty here.

LeoFan +1 Those that said perfectly legal - CORRECT.

Casey was beyond the line of scrimmage and didn't hook slide. Therefore even if it was a helmet-helmet hit (which it wasnt) it still would have been a legal hit.
As for intent to injure, well if the BC DB's get a chance to hit a QB that is running and not sliding, I would hope they try to knock him into next week. (or in Edmonton's case - eastern Canada :slight_smile: )

Well I consider myself to be an objective fan, more or less.

I am certainly not a Calgary fan particularly, nor am I a Lions' fan particularly. Neither the Stamps nor the LIons are my favourite team. So to that extent I consider myself to have looked at the hit objectively. To me it looked like a helmet to helmet hit. Browner left his feet, launched himself like a missle, lead with his head, and to me that replay looks like helmet to helmet contact.

Compare it to when Mo Lloyd destroyed that kid Reaves, the Argo QB, on the runback of an interception; Lloyd did not leave his feet, he hit Reaves shoulder to chest; a good football hit. This one was, at best, borderline.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I can do that 8)


Helmet to helmet hits are illegal no-matter-how-it-is-done. Article 4 section (b) Any blow above the passer’s shoulder.


Helmet to helmet hits are illegal no-matter-how-it-is-done. Article 4 section (b) Any blow above the passer’s shoulder.

That is any blow, not just helmet to helmet.

Which means that the ruling on the field was a hit below the head.

Doyo, the play in question he was running the ball, beyond the line of scrimmage and not hook sliding. So he is no longer a 'passer' but he is the same as any other player like a running back.
The rule you're thinking of applies to Roughing the Passer penalties.

My favorite part of that rule is section (a). Must have been written by somebody whose English was not their primary language. :slight_smile: