Lionbackers.com

So just browsing through Twitter and I came across this nugget:

Gord Barnsley ‏@WinnipegGordo

"Keep going low on the QB" quote at 2:57. #LionsBountyGate #CFL

In case it defaults to the wrong clip, it's 2:57 into the 4th quarter video, with 14:08 left in the game. Buck was already gone by that point so I don't see what the big to do is. Comments?

http://watch.tsn.ca/cfl-games-on-demand ... clip712607

CatsEyes wrote:So just browsing through Twitter and I came across this nugget:

Gord Barnsley ‏@WinnipegGordo

"Keep going low on the QB" quote at 2:57. #LionsBountyGate #CFL

In case it defaults to the wrong clip, it's 2:57 into the 4th quarter video, with 14:08 left in the game. Buck was already gone by that point so I don't see what the big to do is. Comments?

http://watch.tsn.ca/cfl-games-on-demand ... clip712607

That was after the Brink hit that Suitor suggested the league may review it. Likely was that it was Carl Hairston notifying the DL to avoid any head shots to the QB.

That's what I figured-an overdramatic Bomber fan taking things out of context :p

Yeah, that hit may have been a bit borderline but I certainly didn't think there was any intent there. Kind of got Brink in the breast plate and the helmut slide up into Brink's as he was going backwards.

Sir Purrcival wrote:Yeah, that hit may have been a bit borderline but I certainly didn't think there was any intent there. Kind of got Brink in the breast plate and the helmut slide up into Brink's as he was going backwards.

I don't think there was any intent either, however intent is neither here nor there when determining an illegal hit.

No penalty was called and I didn't get the impression one should have been called.

So much ado about nothing including the coaches comments.

There was no dirty play that I saw by either side during the game. I suppose some Lions fans might suggest the horsecollar tackle was dirty. I would agree it's a penalty by rule but don't think that particular tackle was a dirty play compared to some other vicious horsecollar tackles we've seen.

Blue In BC wrote:

Sir Purrcival wrote:Yeah, that hit may have been a bit borderline but I certainly didn't think there was any intent there. Kind of got Brink in the breast plate and the helmut slide up into Brink's as he was going backwards.

I don't think there was any intent either, however intent is neither here nor there when determining an illegal hit.

No penalty was called and I didn't get the impression one should have been called.

So much ado about nothing including the coaches comments.

There was no dirty play that I saw by either side during the game. I suppose some Lions fans might suggest the horsecollar tackle was dirty. I would agree it's a penalty by rule but don't think that particular tackle was a dirty play compared to some other vicious horsecollar tackles we've seen.

Yea like the horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup. Maybe an "investigation" should be done on the Bomber coaching technic as they seem to horse collar alot.

Zarquon wrote:

Blue In BC wrote:

Sir Purrcival wrote:Yeah, that hit may have been a bit borderline but I certainly didn't think there was any intent there. Kind of got Brink in the breast plate and the helmut slide up into Brink's as he was going backwards.

I don't think there was any intent either, however intent is neither here nor there when determining an illegal hit.

No penalty was called and I didn't get the impression one should have been called.

So much ado about nothing including the coaches comments.

There was no dirty play that I saw by either side during the game. I suppose some Lions fans might suggest the horsecollar tackle was dirty. I would agree it's a penalty by rule but don't think that particular tackle was a dirty play compared to some other vicious horsecollar tackles we've seen.

Yea like the horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup. Maybe an "investigation" should be done on the Bomber coaching technic as they seem to horse collar alot.

I call Bulls*** on that comment. The Bombers are not a dirty team. I might add that Sanchez was known as a dirty player during his career. Who did he play for last? Oh yes, it was the Lions.

So don't go making up crap.

I don't specifically remember a horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup, but if there was one, I assume a penalty was called.

So what's your point?

Horsecollars end seasons for players, however in both cases the HC isn't what I would consider of that variety. I am not completely sure why the league went from full tolerance to this version of zero tolerance, at minimum there should be a difference in penalization for the two infractions.

Stuff happens, as Donald Rumsfeld said about the U.S. in Iraq.

Williams hit on Brink was borderline. His head was in Brink's chest and did ride up near to or on Brink's chin. Intentional? Who knows? But too close. Williams should be coached away from such a hit.

Horsecollar against Brown? Yes.

Not a dirty game IMO. Some stuff happens.

Blue In BC wrote:

Zarquon wrote: Yea like the horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup. Maybe an "investigation" should be done on the Bomber coaching technic as they seem to horse collar alot.

I call Bulls*** on that comment. The Bombers are not a dirty team. I might add that Sanchez was known as a dirty player during his career. Who did he play for last? Oh yes, it was the Lions.

So don't go making up crap.

I don't specifically remember a horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup, but if there was one, I assume a penalty was called.

So what's your point?

Get off your high horse. I was saying it tongue in cheek, hence the emocicon.

As for the housecollar on Lulay it was a real nasty one flipped him around and flung him out of bounds and yes Willis was flagged. As for Sanchez show me one "dirty" play while he was a Lion?

Rammer wrote:Horsecollars end seasons for players, however in both cases the HC isn't what I would consider of that variety. I am not completely sure why the league went from full tolerance to this version of zero tolerance, at minimum there should be a difference in penalization for the two infractions.

They have that type of rule in effect for facemask penalties with two levels of penalties. So if a ref can make a judgement on a facemask then I agree why not on the level of HC penalty?

Again. I don't disagree that within the current rule it was a penalty. However, even re-watching the play on PVR, I was still not sure whether the Bomber grabbed the top of the shoulder pad, the top of the jersey or just below the neckline of the jersey.

When I saw it live, I thought it would get flagged for HC.

Zarquon wrote:

Blue In BC wrote:

Zarquon wrote: Yea like the horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup. Maybe an "investigation" should be done on the Bomber coaching technic as they seem to horse collar alot.

I call Bulls*** on that comment. The Bombers are not a dirty team. I might add that Sanchez was known as a dirty player during his career. Who did he play for last? Oh yes, it was the Lions.

So don't go making up crap.

I don't specifically remember a horsecollar on Lulay during the Grey Cup, but if there was one, I assume a penalty was called.

So what's your point?

Get off your high horse. I was saying it tongue in cheek, hence the emocicon.

As for the housecollar on Lulay it was a real nasty one flipped him around and flung him out of bounds and yes Willis was flagged. As for Sanchez show me one "dirty" play while he was a Lion?

Wrong emoticon. Should have used a " wink ". Yours more represents a statement being made that is ambiguous.

I don't have any film of Sanchez during his days with the Lions. Suggesting a player that had a reputation as a dirty player suddenly cleaned up his act as a Lions. That would defy the odds. Didn't he go low on an Esk receiver in 2010 and end his career?

Did Rob Murphy change his ways in Toronto?

How did Davis Sanchez get dragged into this, I thought he retired after playing for Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and finally BC? His reputation can't have been that bad given the teams that signed him? I always thought he was a hard hitter who played with an edge, but I would never go so far as to suggest he was dirty.

ziggy wrote:How did Davis Sanchez get dragged into this, I thought he retired after playing for Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and finally BC? His reputation can't have been that bad given the teams that signed him? I always thought he was a hard hitter who played with an edge, but I would never go so far as to suggest he was dirty.

Besides the tag of 'dirty' belongs lovingly to a former BC Lion with the number 30.

Rammer wrote:

ziggy wrote:How did Davis Sanchez get dragged into this, I thought he retired after playing for Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and finally BC? His reputation can't have been that bad given the teams that signed him? I always thought he was a hard hitter who played with an edge, but I would never go so far as to suggest he was dirty.

Besides the tag of 'dirty' belongs lovingly to a former BC Lion with the number 30.

Oh no Rammer, don't drag him into this