Mitchell 2-gamed suspended for dirty play

[xon100]

[Two separate issues like that have to be at least a concern. Mitchell appealing the suspension suggests he feels he has done no wrong. That just bad for the league.

Or maybe he just thinks that 2 games is too big of a penalty? Considering Cohon has only ever suspended 3 players, the rest have had their sentences commuted to fines. Almost every player appeals a suspension, the fact that he is really doesnt suggest how he feels at all.

[MikeAK]

I imagine the appeal will knock the suspension down to 1 game. I just can't see him walking away with just a fine... who knows though

[WestCoastJoe]

Mitchell has every right to defend himself through the appeal. What if there had been punches back and forth throughout the game? This is not necessarily a one-sided street mugging.

Once again, I am not condoning what I see on the tape. But I am not prepared to crucify Khalif Mitchell either. He deserves a hearing.

If Khalif feels that being double teamed and punched in the gut allows him to viciously wrench his opponent's arm, he is wrong. Don't know that yet.

Do we know everything about what happened? No, I don't think we necessarily do. It looks bad. And it just may be that Khalif feels hard done by. Well that won't cut it. Is it possible that his appeal is just that of a young, emotionally transparent man who was facing more emotionally mature opponents, who goaded him to over-react? If so, then there is no substance to his appeal, and he would have possibly been better to just say he did wrong, apologize and move on. Was there other stuff between him and Rottier and the other O Linemen that mitigate the circumstances? Don't know yet.

If a guy is double teamed, cut blocked, held constantly, punched in the chest and belly and neck all game, does that justify trying to injure Rottier's arm? No.

Punched in the privates? Different matter. Eyes gouged? Different matter. Hand stepped on? Different matter. Kneed on the bottom of the pile? Different matter. Pulled to the ground as Doug Brown was? Different matter. These guys are not saints out there.

Personally it seems to me Rottier's forgiveness might indicate that he would feel very guilty if he just piled on Mitchell and condemned him for his action. Or Rottier could just be that rare thing, a true Christian in thought and action and forgiveness.

Khalif wears his emotions on his sleeves it seems to me. Not much deception there.

Once again, I do not condone what he did. But I look forward to hearing the results of the meeting. Not sure how much information they share. I suppose a review of the entire game tape might be considered. I suppose they could listen to team mates of both parties. Dunno. Probably just listen to what Khalif has to say. If he refers to other stuff, then they might do some tape review. Dunno ...

So for me, I don't condone what he did. I feel he has every right to a hearing. I love how he played for us down the stretch last year. I loved his emotional play, his passion, his energy, his personality.

I have already accepted the 2 game ruling. If it is reduced I accept that also.

I am glad that Kavis Reed and Eric Tillman are relatively quiet in this matter, not playing "holier than thou." No diabetes claims, et cetera. Stuff goes on in football. We all know that. Since there will be a hearing I believe the Lions are right in making no more public statements.

Let the situation play out. I do kind of think that Schultz and Dunigan were a little too ready to throw Mitchell to the wolves. Mitchell is not, in my opinion, a sneaky player. Some guys who do have intent to injure are sneaky and can get away with it. That does not seem to me to be the kind of guy that Khalif Mitchell is. At this time I do not know for certain about his "intent." The meeting may clear that up, or it may not.

(As we all know, the sneaky instigator in hockey oftentimes gets away with it. The transparent retaliator gets caught. Not saying that is the case with Rottier. But I am waiting until we hear the results of the meeting. I will actually be surprised if anything changes.)

(When Jason Jimenez was here I did not suspect him of dirty play. There was no tape of the Anthony Gargiulo hit. Everybody could see his attempted leg takeout of Brent Johnson. That showed intent IMO. And I was surprised as it was downright scary. If Johnson's cleats had held the turf, his leg would have been shattered in the roll up of a 320 pound man. That made me think that there might have been intent with Gargiuolo.)

[pennw]

Hey all,

The great Rob Murphy's interview with TSN radio Toronto:

http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/Rob%20Murphy.mp3

Cheers,

James

Thanks for the link . Interesting perspective Murphy gives . According to Murphy , things like that happen every game , but usually it is done out of view .This time caught on TV . Rob seems to have a very low view of Esk o-line . IMO if there was premeditated intent to injure it would have been done out of view.
Interesting his view of Jimenez and Brent Johnson .

[WestCoastJoe]

Hey all,

The great Rob Murphy's interview with TSN radio Toronto:

http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/Rob%20Murphy.mp3

Cheers,

James

Thanks for the link . Interesting perspective Murphy gives . According to Murphy , things like that happen every game , but usually it is done out of view .This time caught on TV . Rob seems to have a very low view of Esk o-line . IMO if there was premeditated intent to injure it would have been done out of view.
Interesting his view of Jimenez and Brent Johnson .

Finally got a chance to listen to Murphy's interview. Very articulate.

He refers to the "dark underbelly of the game" where this stuff happens "all the time, every game." But it is usually out of view.

Murphy says there is a line that he never crossed, he never tried to hurt a player, as in money or career lost, or no food on the table.

He says Jason Jimenez was a pariah, well known by his teammates for his vicious, uncaring, deliberately dirty play. No conscience. The attempted hit on Brent Johnson was the same as the Gargiulio hit, but the Gargiulio hit was not caught on camera.

Re Khalif Mitchell ... "should not have happened" ... But this kind of stuff goes on every game. He says unskilled O Linemen drape themselves on the backs of the D Linemen, putting them greatly at risk as their legs are attacked by other O Linemen. He says the Eskimos are the worst at doing this in the league. He says he is not defending Mitchell but that this stuff goes on all the time, and D Linemen get frustrated. It is trench warfare, but this stuff usually goes unnoticed. He says he feels it is ironic him supporting a D Lineman.

He agrees that the statue of Joe Paterno needed to be taken down. Paterno was mostly interested in his record and winning. He says the $60 million fine will go to good causes. The stigma on Penn State will not go away easily, as it should not, as abuse against elders, the young and beaten wives needs attention.

Hey, way to go, Big Murph.

One funny thing he said, on any interception, there were automatically 3 defenders with nasty intent trying to take him out. LOL

[rb]

Mitchell appealing the suspension suggests he feels he has done no wrong.

No, it suggests that he doesn't want to lose 11% of his income and he is using a legitimate process to try to reduce or eliminate that loss.

I've seen some rather nasty stuff in this league and a one-game suspension has been the outer limit. Usually it's just a fine. Jimenez on Gargiulo, which was vicious and produced the worst result (career-ending injury to a young, talented player), ended up being the maximum fine (half-game pay, i.e. 2.8% of annual salary).

[Toppy Vann]

Mitchell appealing the suspension suggests he feels he has done no wrong.

No, it suggests that he doesn't want to lose 11% of his income and he is using a legitimate process to try to reduce or eliminate that loss.

I've seen some rather nasty stuff in this league and a one-game suspension has been the outer limit. Usually it's just a fine. Jimenez on Gargiulo, which was vicious and produced the worst result (career-ending injury to a young, talented player), ended up being the maximum fine (half-game pay, i.e. 2.8% of annual salary).

I think this is the rationale.

But the CFL are completely bush league on this one:

until the week of August 6, and that they've agreed to stay the suspension until the conclusion of the appeal, meaning Mitchell is eligible to play until the appeal decision is announced

That is completely disgusting and wrong at every level and by every criteria imaginable. This is football. There is no need to dig out precedents and cite case law and file legal arguments ad infinitum. This is shocking as it continues the issue too far into the future and the player doesn't stop playing right away.

The Lions couldn't even stop the guy from appealing as it is player union agreement that is involved and hoping it gets to 1 game which would be the best outcome for the guy and the Lions.

If the CFL wants the court of public opinion to keep condemning Mitchell until the appeal this is a brilliant strategy! However it also brings the CFL into disrepute as they can't get their act together to handle a simple player appeal!! Shocking, appalling and disgusting.

When you make a CFL salary of course you will do what it takes to make sure you don't lose money. A hockey player's salary loss is from a millionaire's salary usually and hardly a big issue. So many of the Imports have two homes to support - one back home in the USA and their living in BC. I understand the appeal but get it done and fast.

[WestCoastJoe]

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/foot ... story.html

Khalif Mitchell appeals suspension, will continue to play

By Mike Beamish, Vancouver Sun July 24, 2012 7:30 PM

VANCOUVER - Some people think that it is something to apologize for, not appeal.

But that is what Khalif Mitchell of the B.C. Lions is doing, taking advantage of a provision in the CFL collective bargaining agreement to have his two-game sentence imposed by commissioner Mark Cohon reviewed by an arbitrator.

The decision to appeal his suspension, imposed Monday in the wake of an arm-bar takedown of the Eskimos’ Simeon Rottier in Friday’s game at BC Place Stadium, means that Mitchell will be free to wreak havoc on CFL offences for at least the next two games, both on the road.

The Lions play the Calgary Stampeders at McMahon Stadium Saturday before B.C. faces the Toronto Argonauts at Rogers Centre on Monday, Aug. 6. While his teammates scatter for their no-practice bye week following the Argo game, Mitchell will remain in Toronto to have his appeal heard by an independent arbitrator.

Lions GM Wally Buono said Mitchell simply is taking advantage of the appeal process open to him in the collective agreement. To infer that an appeal means the club is “condoning” unacceptable behaviour is not only unfair to the Lions but wrong, Buono said.

“The appeal is not by the club,” Buono explained Tuesday. “We don’t condone bad behaviour. We’ve released a number of players over the years because of their bad behaviour. We’re not orchestrating this. That’s not the case at all. But we’re protecting an individual’s right to appeal, just like we have the right in this country to appeal a speeding ticket.”

Mitchell earned widespread condemnation for twisting the arm and hyperextending the elbow of Rottier, an offensive lineman, in the first half of Edmonton’s 27-14 win over the Lions.

When interviewed later, Mitchell called it “a football play.”

But CFL commissioner Mark Cohon, in a press release issued Monday, called Mitchell’s actions “unnecessary, reckless . . . this type of behaviour has no place in our game and will not be tolerated.”

Hall of Famer Matt Dunigan, a member of CFL royalty, indignantly tweeted that Mitchell should have been suspended “for three or four games,” although retired Blue Bomber and probable future Hall of Famer Doug Brown suggested that some of the fault should lie with Rottier for placing his arm where it wasn’t supposed to be.

“I watched the play. I can make two conclusions. But I don’t have to make the decision,” Buono said. “I’m not the judge and jury. But I’ve got to respect the due process. Whether I want to condone him or praise him, it’s not relevant at this time. What’s relevant is that the facts be stated.”

Asked whether he considered Mitchell’s action a flagrant violation of the rules and a flaunting of acceptable behaviour, Buono responded, “No more than a guy who gets a clipping penalty, no more than a guy who gets a holding penalty. This is a reaction in the spur of the moment. This is not intent. In a game, the majority of those are reactionary.”


Whatever it was, Mitchell’s suspension and appeal certainly had the ability to draw a media crush not seen since the days of the controversial Casey Printers.

After being prepped for several minutes, Mitchell faced his inquisitors and basically re-affirmed what he’d told them on Friday night.

“I’m very blessed to have a clear conscience,” he said. “When I go to bed, and look at myself in the mirror, I know who I really have to answer to. I play very hard, and I play very fair.”


While Rottier still maintains that Mitchell’s action was a deliberate intent to injure, he showed his charitable side by saying he felt the need to “forgive and move on.”

“From my perspective, forgiven means letting go of the bitterness.”

Mitchell said he was unaware of Rottier’s comments.

“After the game, I made all the statements I was going to make,” he said. “I don’t think my statements now would be any more clear. I think all the statements I made then were very just, very factual.”

At the time, Mitchell said his scuffle with Rottier “was in the confines of the play. I’m a nasty player. I’m not a dirty player. I play to the end of the whistle.”

Asked Tuesday if he’d ever committed an act in football that he later regretted, Mitchell responded, “We’ve got to wrap up the meeting. I’m sorry.”

[WestCoastJoe]

Lions GM Wally Buono said Mitchell simply is taking advantage of the appeal process open to him in the collective agreement. To infer that an appeal means the club is “condoning” unacceptable behaviour is not only unfair to the Lions but wrong, Buono said.

“The appeal is not by the club,” Buono explained Tuesday. “We don’t condone bad behaviour. We’ve released a number of players over the years because of their bad behaviour. We’re not orchestrating this. That’s not the case at all. But we’re protecting an individual’s right to appeal, just like we have the right in this country to appeal a speeding ticket.”

Mitchell earned widespread condemnation for twisting the arm and hyperextending the elbow of Rottier, an offensive lineman, in the first half of Edmonton’s 27-14 win over the Lions.

When interviewed later, Mitchell called it “a football play.”

But CFL commissioner Mark Cohon, in a press release issued Monday, called Mitchell’s actions “unnecessary, reckless . . . this type of behaviour has no place in our game and will not be tolerated.”

Hall of Famer Matt Dunigan, a member of CFL royalty, indignantly tweeted that Mitchell should have been suspended “for three or four games,” although retired Blue Bomber and probable future Hall of Famer Doug Brown suggested that some of the fault should lie with Rottier for placing his arm where it wasn’t supposed to be.

“I watched the play. I can make two conclusions. But I don’t have to make the decision,” Buono said. “I’m not the judge and jury. But I’ve got to respect the due process. Whether I want to condone him or praise him, it’s not relevant at this time. What’s relevant is that the facts be stated.”

Asked whether he considered Mitchell’s action a flagrant violation of the rules and a flaunting of acceptable behaviour, Buono responded, “No more than a guy who gets a clipping penalty, no more than a guy who gets a holding penalty. This is a reaction in the spur of the moment. This is not intent. In a game, the majority of those are reactionary.”

Whatever it was, Mitchell’s suspension and appeal certainly had the ability to draw a media crush not seen since the days of the controversial Casey Printers.

After being prepped for several minutes, Mitchell faced his inquisitors and basically re-affirmed what he’d told them on Friday night.

“I’m very blessed to have a clear conscience,” he said. “When I go to bed, and look at myself in the mirror, I know who I really have to answer to. I play very hard, and I play very fair.”

While Rottier still maintains that Mitchell’s action was a deliberate intent to injure, he showed his charitable side by saying he felt the need to “forgive and move on.”

“From my perspective, forgiven means letting go of the bitterness.”

The team is letting due process takes its course.

Mitchell is getting the hearing he is entitled to.

[notahomer]

Hey all,

The great Rob Murphy's interview with TSN radio Toronto:

http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/Rob%20Murphy.mp3

Cheers,

James

Thanks for posting. I listened to it and Murphy surprised me with his comments about Jimenez. I haven't forgotten the times Jimenez came onto this board to defend himself. It was neat listening to Murphy apparently have such little respect for a former team-mate. One thing I came away from this interview wanting is the 'tight camera angles' Murph was talking about. He claims it can't happen due to our field size but if this kind of stuff is happening every game then I have that much more respect for the O-line and D-line players.

[Blue In BC]

[Two separate issues like that have to be at least a concern. Mitchell appealing the suspension suggests he feels he has done no wrong. That just bad for the league.

Or maybe he just thinks that 2 games is too big of a penalty? Considering Cohon has only ever suspended 3 players, the rest have had their sentences commuted to fines. Almost every player appeals a suspension, the fact that he is really doesnt suggest how he feels at all.

If that wasn't worth a 2 game suspension then what would be. Do you have to beat a player on the sidelines with your helmet during the national anthem. There are many people suggesting the suspension is not long enough. Doesn't the bad press for the player, the team and the league just suggest he should just take what the league has decided. The CFL is not a court system so I don't know I think players should even be allowed to appeal the decision. He should be allowed to discuss this during the meeting with the league but once the decision is reached, that should be it.

The only argument I can offer is the comparison to the NFL where players have been suspended for the season for having a " bounty " on players.

IMO the length of the season is not the issue in regard to the % of games being suspended. The action involved, intent etc must all be considered in each instance. To think there is nothing any player could do to not warrant more than 1 game because it's only an 18 game season doesn't make sense to me.

[ziggy]

The right to appeal is in the players contract as I understand it. Who knows why he has decided to exercise his right? Maybe he feels there are factors that won't excuse his act, but might mitigate it in the eyes of CFL fans? I personally wish he'd just accept it as I find it provides a a focal point for other fans to tee off against the team.

After reading some of the comments on other sites, I'm curious as to why so many fans from other teams feel that our coach and GM should get involved in a process that the players union (which includes their players as well ) has negotiated and is running its course. If they have a problem with the appeal process, maybe they should be contacting their home teams player reps?

I must admit I prefer the NHL model where the player has a hearing in a timely fashion (days) and the punishment meted out immediately.

[DanoT]

I think anybody that thinks he knows Mitchell intent is just fooling themselves. my comments are true. i guess the truth hurts too much to some of you people. what i can not understand how you all can call yourselves lions fans yet criticize the team and its players. Real team fans support their team through thick and thin and don't jump to conclusions. Mark my words. Mitchell suspension will be reduced and maybe to nothing.
leo

Oh great, the 'real fan' comment. Well, I guess you are right. I a real CFL fan and the Lions are my favourite team. But if you KNOW I am not a real fan, I guess I better stop renewing the season tickets I've had for years. I get letters from the club thanking me for my support. I guess I'll keep my BC LIons tickets because it means a heck of a lot more to me that they think I'm a "REAL FAN" than you do....

I don't claim to to know Mitchell's intent. I do find the behaviour disgusting. Doug Brown's perspective helps a bit, I like what he had to say. I still think Mitchell deserves a suspension and I'm going to happily cheer Mitchell on once this is behind him regardless of his appeal. I don't hate Mitchell, I hate what he did......

IMO being a REAL fan implies a high level of football knowledge and with that comes the ability to
look at plays objectively with the team coloured glasses off. The tape makes it clean that Mitchell's "manoeuvre" was intentional, not accidental, and should be punished. The purpose of the appeal process should be about the length of suspension and not guilt/innocence.

I too like what Doug Brown had to say.

[Blue In BC]

All I'm saying is that the player should be entitled to state his case to the league before the rulling is made. It shouldn't need to go to a 2nd step " appeal ". That still allows him to plead his case with representation if he chooses. All of this should happen within a couple of days of the game in which the issue happened.

Of course a player isn't going to want to lose 11% of his salary at anytime.

If you get a traffic ticket for speeding at double the limit you have the right to appeal. Doesn't that also suggest a driver not wanting to pay the fine but using the system to find a loophole in the process to prevent paying and / or not acknowledge being in the wrong?

Wouldn't logic suggest if Mitchell felt he had done wrong he would accept the ruling of the league? IMO that is where we're going to disagree that he has taken that position.

I guess we'll see what the outcome turns out to be. Whatever it is, I hope it doesn't drag out creating a further circus.

[KnowItAll]

Doug Brown played on DL. Of course he is going to want to defend the D player and try to put some of the blame on the OL.

However, it doesnt matter what doug, or rob or chris or anybody else says goes on in the trenches or if the victim in this case has hold of his jersey illegally, or whatever. All that matters is that all KM had to do to "get loose" was to spin as he did with his arms and hands up. When he grabbed the victims arms and held on tight while spinning, then that was a deliberate undefensible contemptable attempt to severely injure. His guilt cannot be watered down by any other facts or fiction.