When will the league do something about what appears to be a league wide attack of helmet to helmet plays vs this Tiger Cat Team ?
Yeah, 4 times without a call...
It won't stop unless Ricky Ray becomes a Ticat.
Hate to admit this but I fell asleep at half time, caught myself a couple of times in 2nd quarter napping; up 17 hours so that's my excuse. Now the questions: who got the helmet hit this week, were there any other injuries? Stuff on the i'net is all about poor stumps having to play without Cornish. Nothing about our O line all injured or key members of the D also out.
Cats should have a spot put on their helmets for opposing players to use as a target
Not sure about that. Argo fans are crying foul that Ricky received a slap to the helmet on their last drive that wasn't called (as opposed to the incidental contact by Reed on Mitchell that WAS called). Yet for some reason they miss a blatant (not necessarily intentional) hit on Tasker. Go figure! :roll:
Re: Helmet to helmet: On the botched field goal attempt, Luke Tasker (the holder) got blasted when he tried to run with the ball. Not sure about other injuries, apart from the obvious spiritual ones.
While I'm sure the Cats will send the film of the hit on Tasker to the league, I think (shudder) Jock Climie has a valid point about this topic in general: There is helmet-to-helmet contact on every play. And when two players are coming at each other head on, they both try to get low, and helmets are bound to hit each other to some degree unless the defender just lays down.
Clearly, QBs and Kickers need special protection because of how often they are in a vulnerable position, but on other plays, or once the QB takes off running, I think it becomes muddier.
Even if the defender comes in low toward the chest/shoulder, oftentimes the ball carrier crouches into the hit instinctively, resulting in a helmet-to-helmet collision.
Clearly, the league feels the old "no leading with the crown of the helmet" rule was too limited. The problem is how to set objective criteria to distinguish really flagrant helmet-to-helmet hits from the incidental helmet contact that is unavoidable.
Tasker had his arm raised to throw just before he was hit helmet to helmet(no question on this)
It was a Major penalty missed.
Would have made it HAM 1st and goal from the 8 yard line if called
Thanks for mentioning this (the arm raised to throw). I must have missed it the first time around. I'll have to take another look.
Using Reed's penalty as the baseline, then Ottawa should have been penalized for the slap on Ray. If Ray is the baseline then there should have been no Penalty on Reed. So it's the only consistency of CFL refs which is inconsistency. Players don't know what will or will not be called.
As for the hit on Tasker, I have not replayed it from last night, but I thought the stamp player lead with his helmet high and was the first point of contact with Tasker's helmet and should have been a penalty.
Clime is an idiot, everyone knows there is helmet to helmet contact on every play, but the problem is how players use their helmets as part of a tackle. Yes players go low in anticipation of contact, but if you use proper technique the type of contact with the head that they are trying to avoid should be limited.
Again with Tasker, he was high and so was the hit.
Not condoning Helmet to helmet hits but I think this was an accidental collision. I think both players were surprised to collide into each other. I don't think the Stamps player even knew Tasker would be there with the ball till they collided.
As for the "slap on Ray's helmet, if they start calling defensive linesmen for having their arms up trying to block a throw, they might as well put cardboard cutouts in their place.
Got to agree with this. Soon the QB will be an unhittable player. Those kind of calls are ruining the game.
Pretty soon the QBs will wear flags, you just run up and grab the flag rip it off, the refs blow it dead.
safetyblitz and others thanks for the info
Yes, he had his arm raised as if to pass. But he did not throw it, and therefore was not a passer. And therefore the Roughing the Passer did not apply. The Unnecessary Roughness rule, however, definitely applied.
[b]RULE 7 – FOULS & PENALTIES SECTION 2 – MAJOR FOULS Article 3 – Unnecessary Roughness[/b] (f) Using the helmet to butt, ram or spear an opponent, including but not limited to, a passer, a receiver in the act of catching a pass, a ball carrier in the grasp of another tackler or a ball carrier on the playing surface not attempting to advance, (h) Contacting an opponent above the shoulders in an unnecessarily rough manner, including the long snapper on kicks from scrimmage and convert attempts,Either of these two clauses could have been applied to the hit on Tasker.
We definitely need to switch back to the yellow helmet so opposing players and officials can actually see our helmets. Maybe then, our players won't get hit in the head as often, and when they do, penalties will get called correctly.
Interesting point re the colour (i.e. shade) of the Cats' helmets perhaps being a factor in hits to the head being missed. If any of you have the NFL Network, you should tune in (or dig around online) for the America's Game documentary on the 1976 Oakland Raiders and their championship season. OLB Phil Villapiano goes into an extensive discussion on the Raiders' use of arm and hand padding that, well, often would be considered illegal then and surely now. John Madden then chimed in with an excellent Al Davis-approved point: playing a team with dark uniforms, you wear dark(read black) pads to conceal holding by the O-line...and wear white padding when facing a white-uniformed team (most road teams in the NFL). I would guess that black padding is worn more in the CFL and NFL as more teams have black as some part of their colour scheme than any other colour/shade. Perhaps other teams wear black padding more in our games (particularly when playing Hamilton on the road), so cases of forearm, elbow, or hand shots to the head are not seen as much in live action.
It IS a theory. I would prefer to chalk up the bias against the Cats to the long-standing Jake Ireland Syndrome, but I digress.
Oski Wee Wee,
A few years back, someone posted an academic study indicating that historical statisitcs showed that sports teams wearing black tend to get penalized more than teams wearing other colors. Correlation is not causation, and I don't know how rigorous the study was, but still interesting fodder.
Red cars are more likely to get a speeding ticket too.
The helmet slap on Ray was not an intentional hit and hardly a concern, however the hit on Tasker was a helmet lead hit, intentional for sure.
When will it stop?
When the two darlings of the CFL (Ray and Durant) get knocked info next Christmas...
THEN (and only then) will you see it stop...
But all the defensive players know they wouldn't get away with hitting them, so they try to avoid them. Other teams' QBs? Not so much. And Ticat players? Not at all.