just wondering why belli didnt get a suspension from punch a winnipeg player below the belt last week...
this isnt the first time, he did it to a sask player a few years ago back when he was with hamilton...
Is it because he is an argo? thats the only thing i can think of... as the argos appear to be free from any discipline from the league head office...
im sorry i dont watch every single game belli plays..the guy is a joke
At the time of the one against the riders, the announcers said that Belli was known for these kind of cheap tactics...and i was watching a game earlier this year saying that belli had been much better this year, discipline wise, cause he takes stupid penalties all the time
the mere fact that he has done it before, and been kicked out for it, atleast once... should warrant a harsher penalty than what he got last time...
consider a person who commits armed roberry... and lets say the judge decides to go easy and only give them a few years in jail, now lets consider a couple years later he does it again... would there be a harsher penalty because of the repeat offence? of course there would be...
basically, what u guys are saying is that if your team is losing a game, and you are frustrated, u can go up to a player on the other team and punch him in the testicles... and all that will happen to you is getting kicked out of that game... nothing more... think about it, does this make sense?
the act was deliberate and not a first time thing... and lets not forget that punching someone in the testicles is about the most dishonerable thing you can do to someone.. its grossly unsportsmanlike and cowardly
He got kicked out of the game, what more do you want? Khan wasnt injured much on the play, so I dont think that deserves a suspension. If he manages to get kicked out today, then maybe a suspension might be warranted.
so suspensions should be decided by the injury they cause, not the intent of the action?
I definately dont agree with that... and obviously, what more do I want?? a suspension or a fine... i think ive made that pretty obvious... lol
The point you are missing is that Khan was not seriously hurt on that play. Belli got the right punishment for the crime. I dont think he should have suspended for that, it was a reaction to being pushed down by Khan, no real pre-meditation there. Now, if he went after Khan and intentionally did that, its a different story.
The announcers talking about reputations doesn't mean squat. They are media, and all the media cares about is selling papers. All they do is parrot what the football writers say, without thinking about it.
I don't like Belli either, but suspension for doing something which hasn't been repeated in two years? Besides, if you want to listen to the media, you yourself said it, he's been more disciplined this year than last so shouldn't he be given the benefit of a doubt when it comes to suspension? Ejection, no problem, but suspension is too much.
PS. Have you checked our justice system lately? An armed robber would probably get less time for the second offense than the first. :roll:
The extent of Khan's injury has absolutely nothing to do with the punishment handed out to Belli.
The fact that he's done it before, and the fact that he hasn't done it in a couple of years, have nothing to do with the punishment handed out to Belli.
The rules state that such action will result in ejection from the game. Generally the league reviews all ejections and determines whether further action is needed. Had they suspended him, it would have been justified; but it is their decision whether or not to do so.
Why they didn't suspend him, I couldn't tell you. But I've seen a lot worse go completely unpunished, and I've seen a lot less result in a suspension.