Jimenez suspended

[Rammer]

2) I don't think that the hit being outside the whistle has been established by anyone as of yet.

7) No surprise, as not playing would hit his bank account pretty heavily.

8) That hasn't been put forth anywhere that I have read, just speculation.

Rammer, hasn't it been put forth by the official and further, by suspending him, put forth by the League that the hit was after the whistle? Thanks for Tait's comment, never read that one.

I have heard that the whistle and the hit were one of the concerns of the play, but I haven't heard anything officially on it. The league itself seems to have limited their release on the suspension, perhaps expecting an appeal, thus not boxing themselves in.

[wildthing]

Uhhhhh....



Last ever? And that's coming from where exactly?

well he took a costly suspension at the wrong time of the year, he has missed key blocks resulting in injury to your main QB, could be the straw that costs him his job. It is merely speculation but it is a very good reason to ensure the suspension is taken care of this year

Yeah lets see this line has allowed the fewest sacks and has provided enough holes for Smith to lead the league in rushing, but because he missed one block he is going to be replaced. At this rate the whole league will be replacing offensive lineman. You are either grasping at straws Wildthing or are uninformed?

he is playing a spot typically played by canadians so he is expendable and mistakes like letting the best QB in the league get hit and hurt come back to haunt guys.

[wildthing]

Until such time as you can prove guilt, innocence must be assumed.

I operate under the concept of rationality, prove something, I will believe it. Make blatant assumptions until the cows come home, and nothing else that you say will hold water.

Unless video evidence is presented, or Jimenez comes on here himself and says, "Yes, I did it", he is innocent.

actually by the leagues decision his guilt is now proven. They looked at the evidence and lsitened to the facts and made a decision. He must prove his innocence at this point

[K-Dogg]

2) I don't think that the hit being outside the whistle has been established by anyone as of yet.

7) No surprise, as not playing would hit his bank account pretty heavily.

8) That hasn't been put forth anywhere that I have read, just speculation.

Rammer, hasn't it been put forth by the official and further, by suspending him, put forth by the League that the hit was after the whistle? Thanks for Tait's comment, never read that one.

I have heard that the whistle and the hit were one of the concerns of the play, but I haven't heard anything officially on it. The league itself seems to have limited their release on the suspension, perhaps expecting an appeal, thus not boxing themselves in.

Hey, it's the CFL. They're hoping for someone to question their decision so they can fine them for disparaging comments. Seriously though, I think you're right about them expecting an appeal. As for anything official about it being after the whistle...the official made the call on the field.

[Rammer]

Rammer, hasn't it been put forth by the official and further, by suspending him, put forth by the League that the hit was after the whistle? Thanks for Tait's comment, never read that one.

I have heard that the whistle and the hit were one of the concerns of the play, but I haven't heard anything officially on it. The league itself seems to have limited their release on the suspension, perhaps expecting an appeal, thus not boxing themselves in.

Hey, it's the CFL. They're hoping for someone to question their decision so they can fine them for disparaging comments. Seriously though, I think you're right about them expecting an appeal. As for anything official about it being after the whistle...the official made the call on the field.

For unnecessary roughness, not sure that implies after the whistle explicitly, but hopefully more will be detailed as this process will become public.

[K-Dogg]

I have heard that the whistle and the hit were one of the concerns of the play, but I haven't heard anything officially on it. The league itself seems to have limited their release on the suspension, perhaps expecting an appeal, thus not boxing themselves in.

Hey, it's the CFL. They're hoping for someone to question their decision so they can fine them for disparaging comments. Seriously though, I think you're right about them expecting an appeal. As for anything official about it being after the whistle...the official made the call on the field.

For unnecessary roughness, not sure that implies after the whistle explicitly, but hopefully more will be detailed as this process will become public.

I thought it was rough play?

[LFITQ]

K-Dogg is right. It was for Rough Play.

The thing that I beleive that most people that are being accused of "supporting" Jiminez want to see/hear, is a definitive statement on the timing of the whistle.

Most people that follow football understand that the TYPE of hit that has been described is legal.

So the only question now is if the whistle went before or after the block was made.

IMO I believe that is going to be the key point in Jiminez's appeal. Wally has stated that the whistle came after, Jiminez has said the whistle came after, no one else has said anything else. Eric Tillman yesterday on Team 1040 said that the process for the appeal has to go through and that he has no opinion on the hit. He also said the video he has seen he couldn't tell anything from, thus he has "no opinion". You read the papers and not one of them mentions the whistle. The whistle is the key to the whole thing.

And I for one, if I find out that the whistle did in fact blow BEFORE the block was made, then I will be right there beside Rider fans asking for his suspension.

The problem right now, is that there are those people accusing the fence sitters of being "fanboys", or "supporting" Jiminez, when in actuality they are just wanting some evidence so they can judge for themselves. That is the problem when the only people who are giving "testimony" are not considered to be trustworthy.

Remember, it was the refs that didn't toss Rasouli for his actions against the Riders, so are they credible? Yet it is that same group that is giving the sole testimony. Can you imagine what would ahve happened if Rasouli had gotten away scott-free because there was no video evidence? It was only with the video evidence that he got suspended, otherwise it would have been Rodgers, based on the refs that were right there with it happening right in front of them.

As I said above, let me see the video,let me get a credible source. Let it run the process. As the first one's are not seemingly going to be available, then once the process is through (an dhopefully it isn't buggered up), and the result is the same, then I will be there supporting the suspension or fine or both or whatever as well, if that is what is determined. Until then, I choose to sit on the fence.

[K-Dogg]

K-Dogg is right. It was for Rough Play.

The thing that I beleive that most people that are being accused of "supporting" Jiminez want to see/hear, is a definitive statement on the timing of the whistle.

Most people that follow football understand that the TYPE of hit that has been described is legal.

So the only question now is if the whistle went before or after the block was made.

IMO I believe that is going to be the key point in Jiminez's appeal. Wally has stated that the whistle came after, Jiminez has said the whistle came after, no one else has said anything else. Eric Tillman yesterday on Team 1040 said that the process for the appeal has to go through and that he has no opinion on the hit. He also said the video he has seen he couldn't tell anything from, thus he has "no opinion". You read the papers and not one of them mentions the whistle. The whistle is the key to the whole thing.

And I for one, if I find out that the whistle did in fact blow BEFORE the block was made, then I will be right there beside Rider fans asking for his suspension.

The problem right now, is that there are those people accusing the fence sitters of being "fanboys", or "supporting" Jiminez, when in actuality they are just wanting some evidence so they can judge for themselves. That is the problem when the only people who are giving "testimony" are not considered to be trustworthy.

Remember, it was the refs that didn't toss Rasouli for his actions against the Riders, so are they credible? Yet it is that same group that is giving the sole testimony. Can you imagine what would ahve happened if Rasouli had gotten away scott-free because there was no video evidence? It was only with the video evidence that he got suspended, otherwise it would have been Rodgers, based on the refs that were right there with it happening right in front of them.

As I said above, let me see the video,let me get a credible source. Let it run the process. As the first one's are not seemingly going to be available, then once the process is through (an dhopefully it isn't buggered up), and the result is the same, then I will be there supporting the suspension or fine or both or whatever as well, if that is what is determined. Until then, I choose to sit on the fence.

Good post.

[notahomer]

...As I said above, let me see the video,let me get a credible source. Let it run the process. As the first one's are not seemingly going to be available, then once the process is through (an dhopefully it isn't buggered up), and the result is the same, then I will be there supporting the suspension or fine or both or whatever as well, if that is what is determined. Until then, I choose to sit on the fence.

(these same types of issues float around all prosports Nascar to Hockey-pretty much everything except poker)

[green with envy]

Evidence of the play in question is limited to the public so I'm going to take the opinions of those that have viewed all of the data and spoke to the ref at face value.

The people saying that the block was legal are out to lunch. It is NEVER legal to cut from behind. Cutting from the front is perfectly fair and within the rules. From behind is not.

I'd recommend reading Elliot Freidman's posts about this on 13thman.
http://www.13thman.com/cheers/viewtopic ... 2&start=90

He cut a defenceless player from behind 25 yards away from the play and late to boot. According to Freidman, he tried to do the same thing 3 plays prior. I also witnessed Jiminez do the EXACT same thing to Luc Mullinder against the Riders this year. Luckily Mullinder wasn't hurt. After the cheapshot, Mullinder had to be restrained by 2 teammates.

That's 3 incidents of attempt to injure. IMO, it's pretty clear that Jiminez has no respect for his opponents.

I have the utmost respect for the skills of the Lions line and I actually love the fact that they play with an edge as a former hoggie. That being said, Sherko and Jiminez have both gone over the line this year.

I also think Freidman makes a great point with regards to the union. OK, they are there to defend the players. How about defending the player who's career may be ended by a cheapshot?

[LFITQ]

I'm going to take the opinions of those that have viewed all of the data and spoke to the ref at face value.

So you were one of those rider fans that agreed 100% with the ejections of Mechrek et al in the game against Hamilton, along with the fines that were handed out to Tillman and Austin? Based on this, there is no way you could have agreed with Tillman and Austin's comments, afterall the ref saw it and reported it.

I guess also you agreed that Rasouli shouldn't have been ejected and suspended in the tilt in Taylor field earlier this year, because the ref who sw it on the field didn't think that incident even warranted an ejection (although I would seriously beg to differ).

I also think Freidman makes a great point with regards to the union. OK, they are there to defend the players. How about defending the player who's career may be ended by a cheapshot?

And maybe that's yet another problem that also questions Friedman's credibility. Maybe the CFLPA is considering Garguilio in this case and in their opinion they have looked at it from both sides and put their recommendations in to the League. It took the League 8 days to come to this decision, and according to some sources, they did speak to the CFLPA about it too. Maybe the evidence they saw HAS been factored into what they discussed with the CFL.

He cut a defenceless player from behind 25 yards away from the play and late to boot.

So you have actually seen the play in question and know for a fact it was late and that it was indeed that far away from the play? Could you please tell me where you saw this, so that I might actually get to view it too? Especially considering Eric Tillman said yesterday you couldn't really tell much from the video that he has been shown for him to form an opinion.

[green with envy]

I don't have a problem with the fines as long as it's standard across the league, which it has been. As far as the ejections/non ejections go, IMO, that was the work of one incompetent official. His mistakes were corrected by the league after the fact. Rasouli was suspended and Abou wasn't. The league got it right in the end. Bad comparison.

So you were one of those rider fans that agreed 100% with the ejections of Mechrek et al in the game against Hamilton, along with the fines that were handed out to Tillman and Austin? Based on this, there is no way you could have agreed with Tillman and Austin's comments, afterall the ref saw it and reported it.

I guess also you agreed that Rasouli shouldn't have been ejected and suspended in the tilt in Taylor field earlier this year, because the ref who sw it on the field didn't think that incident even warranted an ejection (although I would seriously beg to differ).

You can question Freidmans credibilty if you want. That's up to you. IMO, he is one of the best sports journalists in the country. According to Freidman, one of the reasons for the delay was due to negotiations between the league and the CFLPA over the length of suspension.

And maybe that's yet another problem that also questions Friedman's credibility. Maybe the CFLPA is considering Garguilio in this case and in their opinion they have looked at it from both sides and put their recommendations in to the League. It took the League 8 days to come to this decision, and according to some sources, they did speak to the CFLPA about it too. Maybe the evidence they saw HAS been factored into what they discussed with the CFL.

I already said I haven't seen it and that I'm taking the opinions of impartial observers at face value. What do the likes of Benefield, Frers, Freidman, Lefko, etc have to gain by lieing? What do expect Tillman to say? He already got whacked by the league big time for commenting on something similar and he's playing the team in question this week. Why give any ammunition? What about the incident that I witnessed FIRST HAND? It was EXACTLY the same as what is being described by those that have witnessed the tape in the media.

So you have actually seen the play in question and know for a fact it was late and that it was indeed that far away from the play? Could you please tell me where you saw this, so that I might actually get to view it too? Especially considering Eric Tillman said yesterday you couldn't really tell much from the video that he has been shown for him to form an opinion.

[hwgill]

actually by the leagues decision his guilt is now proven. They looked at the evidence and lsitened to the facts and made a decision. He must prove his innocence at this point

Well, I guess the other ejections against the Riders O-line were fully deserved, eh? The refs said those Riders deserved ejection, therefore it must be true.

[hwgill]

...and on Freidman's blog, they still haven't put up my comments.

What a bunch of pussies.

[Blue In BC]

The timing of the whistle is irrelevant if it was a Rough Play penalty. You can have that called before or after the whistle.

I understand his right to appeal, however, if the Lions lose the WDF and he got to play, this gets carried over to 2008 at best.

Isn't he a FA going into 2008?

In theory, the WDF could be the last game he ever plays in the CFL if he chooses to go to the NFL.

IMHO, it's not reasonable for the CFL to allow a suspension to not be enforced for the NEXT game, which just happens to be the WDF.

Nothing against him or the Lions, but he should not be dressed on Sunday.