CKNW - Jimenez stayed until off-season

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

leeinq
Rookie
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:15 pm

Disturber wrote:OK, Wildthing,
But doesn't the CFL have the responsibility to take a little less time than 9 days, say... the Monday after the game in question, to hand down the suspension?
The way they've dragged things out, I think they do owe us an explanation.
They provided an explanation of why they DIDN'T suspend Fred Perry for his cheap shot on Dickenson.
Well yes it would have been nice to get it quicker, do we know when BC provided the video to the CFL? Plus, I think the players are allowed under their contract a day off after the game, so it might have been hard to get their side of the story, plus at least one of them was in the hospital and might not have been able to provide his side of the story, but yes, I would think it could have been done within 5 or 6 days.

As for the cheap shot, you mean the legal, no flag hit that was reviewed and seen to be a legal no flag needed hit???
User avatar
agent2
All Star
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:25 pm
Location: Vancouver

No question this situation is all too weird but...
a. It can't be compared to other sports due to the limited number and the importance of the remaining games at this time.
b. Difficult to uphold the suspension due to lack of conclusive evidence.
c. The CFL had to postpone. They had to make it stick last week because penalizing a team with a key suspension at the eleventh hour would be outrageous.
d. Its a great debate but are the rider fans so insecure that they have to flame off over this? Don't you riderfans want to (try and) beat our best? or are you going to cry for years... we coulda... they shoulda... wishing for a lousy suspension? :bawl:
Jer Bear
Rookie
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:25 pm
Location: Saskatchewan

I really hope someone ends Jimenez's career with a after-the-whistle cheap shot on Sunday. I don't care how classless it make me sound, I'm sure you could ask Sherko to take him out, he seems to enjoy post-whistle cheapshots as well :wink:
Last edited by Jer Bear on Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lions4ever
Hall of Famer
Posts: 3430
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2002 7:25 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Jer Bear wrote:I really hope someone ends Jimenz's career with a after-the-whistle cheap shot on Sunday. I don't care how classless it make me sound, I'm sure you could ask Sherko to take him out, he seems to enjoy post-whistle cheapshots as well :wink:
Can a mod please PM a warning to this troll?
Jer Bear
Rookie
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:25 pm
Location: Saskatchewan

Karma will come back to bite Jimenez in the ass eventually, might as well be sooner than later.
User avatar
Rammer
Team Captain
Posts: 22328
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 6:04 pm
Location: Coquitlam, B.C.

Jer Bear wrote:Karma will come back to bite Jimenez in the ass eventually, might as well be sooner than later.
Or maybe this is karma coming to bite the Riders ass sooner.
Entertainment value = an all time low
User avatar
smphantom
Legend
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 3:13 pm
Location: God's Country - North Vancouver

Lions4ever wrote:
Jer Bear wrote:I really hope someone ends Jimenz's career with a after-the-whistle cheap shot on Sunday. I don't care how classless it make me sound, I'm sure you could ask Sherko to take him out, he seems to enjoy post-whistle cheapshots as well :wink:
Can a mod please PM a warning to this troll?
See below. Replace the word troll with 120dB aka chimpy (and a couple other of his aliases), if you prefer.

Image
Stay thirsty my friends.
Blitz
Team Captain
Posts: 9208
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:44 am

This does not mean Jiminez is innocent or guilty of anything, but simply that the League cannot have a player sit out while awaiting arbitration. Cohon made an improper ruling by not staying it when it first came to his desk.
It also doesn't mean he's guilty of anything either. The burden of proof is on the league, not on Jiminez.

There is no conclusive evidence from the video. Cut blocks are legal on the line unless the defensive player is being blocked by another offensive player.

The question is not whether we like or don't like cut blocks. The fact is they are legal on the line of scrimmage and always have been. The fact is that a number of cut blocks take place each game on the line of scrimmage.

The only question is whether the hit took place before or after the whistle. Jiminez was not even flagged for a late hit. He was flagged for rough play. A cut block on the line is not rough play, even if a player gets injured.

So, if the official did not flag him for a late hit but rough play and a cut block is legal I think Jiminez is not guilty of the infraction that was ruled against him. I believe he will win his arbitration case.

The CFL would have been wise to have left this thing alone. Players get injured all the time in CFL football. It was unfortunate for the Calgary player and we all wish that his injury hadn't occured but CFL pro football is not flag football and as Wally says...this is a tough contact sport.

The major reason the CFL went after this thing is due to all the press about our Leos offensive line and all the crying after by Calgary. The CFL was quick to rule that the hit that gave Dickenson his serious concussion was legal. The hit that Jiminez made on his cut block that put the Calgary player out of the game was legal..period.

The only real unbiased evidence the CFL has is the official who made the call and when he didn't call it a late hit but rough play...this whole thing should have been ruled an unfortunate but legal hit and we wouldn't have been dealing with this process.

Now the situation looks like Jiminez is getting away with something by being able to play in the Western Final and possibly the Grey Cup and our Leos are advantaged by his choice of going to arbitration. The CFL league office are the ones who have tainted the whole thing by their complete focus on 'optics' rather than having a clear cut case to suspend Jiminez.

This one will come back to bite the league because it has to have the onus of proof and the arbitrator is going to clearly ask why Jiminez was not given a flag for a late hit at the time the incident took place!!
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
Jer Bear
Rookie
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:25 pm
Location: Saskatchewan

Blitz wrote:
This does not mean Jiminez is innocent or guilty of anything, but simply that the League cannot have a player sit out while awaiting arbitration. Cohon made an improper ruling by not staying it when it first came to his desk.
It also doesn't mean he's guilty of anything either. The burden of proof is on the league, not on Jiminez.

There is no conclusive evidence from the video. Cut blocks are legal on the line unless the defensive player is being blocked by another offensive player.

The question is not whether we like or don't like cut blocks. The fact is they are legal on the line of scrimmage and always have been. The fact is that a number of cut blocks take place each game on the line of scrimmage.

The only question is whether the hit took place before or after the whistle. Jiminez was not even flagged for a late hit. He was flagged for rough play. A cut block on the line is not rough play, even if a player gets injured.

So, if the official did not flag him for a late hit but rough play and a cut block is legal I think Jiminez is not guilty of the infraction that was ruled against him. I believe he will win his arbitration case.

The CFL would have been wise to have left this thing alone. Players get injured all the time in CFL football. It was unfortunate for the Calgary player and we all wish that his injury hadn't occured but CFL pro football is not flag football and as Wally says...this is a tough contact sport.

The major reason the CFL went after this thing is due to all the press about our Leos offensive line and all the crying after by Calgary. The CFL was quick to rule that the hit that gave Dickenson his serious concussion was legal. The hit that Jiminez made on his cut block that put the Calgary player out of the game was legal..period.

The only real unbiased evidence the CFL has is the official who made the call and when he didn't call it a late hit but rough play...this whole thing should have been ruled an unfortunate but legal hit and we wouldn't have been dealing with this process.

Now the situation looks like Jiminez is getting away with something by being able to play in the Western Final and possibly the Grey Cup and our Leos are advantaged by his choice of going to arbitration. The CFL league office are the ones who have tainted the whole thing by their complete focus on 'optics' rather than having a clear cut case to suspend Jiminez.

This one will come back to bite the league because it has to have the onus of proof and the arbitrator is going to clearly ask why Jiminez was not given a flag for a late hit at the time the incident took place!!
Maybe you should apply for a job for the league if you know so much then. Holy... How could you imply that you know better than the league? Give me a break.
User avatar
Luke
All Star
Posts: 325
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Yorkton

Blitz - did the cut block occur on the line? That seems to be the contentious issue to me. Some have mentioned that it happened well behind the play, hence the reason there is no conclusive video evidence of it.
User avatar
Luke
All Star
Posts: 325
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Yorkton

Jer Bear wrote:
Blitz wrote:
This does not mean Jiminez is innocent or guilty of anything, but simply that the League cannot have a player sit out while awaiting arbitration. Cohon made an improper ruling by not staying it when it first came to his desk.
It also doesn't mean he's guilty of anything either. The burden of proof is on the league, not on Jiminez.

There is no conclusive evidence from the video. Cut blocks are legal on the line unless the defensive player is being blocked by another offensive player.

The question is not whether we like or don't like cut blocks. The fact is they are legal on the line of scrimmage and always have been. The fact is that a number of cut blocks take place each game on the line of scrimmage.

The only question is whether the hit took place before or after the whistle. Jiminez was not even flagged for a late hit. He was flagged for rough play. A cut block on the line is not rough play, even if a player gets injured.

So, if the official did not flag him for a late hit but rough play and a cut block is legal I think Jiminez is not guilty of the infraction that was ruled against him. I believe he will win his arbitration case.

The CFL would have been wise to have left this thing alone. Players get injured all the time in CFL football. It was unfortunate for the Calgary player and we all wish that his injury hadn't occured but CFL pro football is not flag football and as Wally says...this is a tough contact sport.

The major reason the CFL went after this thing is due to all the press about our Leos offensive line and all the crying after by Calgary. The CFL was quick to rule that the hit that gave Dickenson his serious concussion was legal. The hit that Jiminez made on his cut block that put the Calgary player out of the game was legal..period.

The only real unbiased evidence the CFL has is the official who made the call and when he didn't call it a late hit but rough play...this whole thing should have been ruled an unfortunate but legal hit and we wouldn't have been dealing with this process.

Now the situation looks like Jiminez is getting away with something by being able to play in the Western Final and possibly the Grey Cup and our Leos are advantaged by his choice of going to arbitration. The CFL league office are the ones who have tainted the whole thing by their complete focus on 'optics' rather than having a clear cut case to suspend Jiminez.

This one will come back to bite the league because it has to have the onus of proof and the arbitrator is going to clearly ask why Jiminez was not given a flag for a late hit at the time the incident took place!!
Maybe you should apply for a job for the league if you know so much then. Holy... How could you imply that you know better than the league? Give me a break.
Many fans on many fan sites imply the same thing you're suggesting. He's entitled to his opinion, just as you are.
User avatar
joesports
All Star
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Section 241 with a great view

Jer Bear wrote:I really hope someone ends Jimenez's career with a after-the-whistle cheap shot on Sunday. I don't care how classless it make me sound, I'm sure you could ask Sherko to take him out, he seems to enjoy post-whistle cheapshots as well :wink:
Nice. :thdn:
bbking
Starter
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:37 pm

Jer Bear wrote:I really hope someone ends Jimenez's career with a after-the-whistle cheap shot on Sunday.



Wow. :no: Did your name lose a k Jer_ Bear.
Blitz
Team Captain
Posts: 9208
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:44 am

Here is a quote from the Stamps own defensive lineman about the play...


The play was just about over," said Stamps defensive lineman Terrence Patrick. "Gargiulo had his back turned. The guy comes and cuts him from the back.

Note the words "the play was 'JUST ABOUT' over!! Another example of the fact that the whistle had not blown. There is no doubt that Jiminez rolled up or cut block the Calgary player from behind. However, as was mentioned over and over again a cut block is not illegal!!

jer ber wrote:
Maybe you should apply for a job for the league if you know so much then. Holy... How could you imply that you know better than the league? Give me a break.
The league won't be making this decision. An arbitrator will. Arbitration is a much different process than the league making a call and having the authority to stick with their decision no matter what the evidence is. They will clearly have to prove they got it right. I have serious doubts that their evidence will win the day.
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
User avatar
Luke
All Star
Posts: 325
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Yorkton

Does anyone know where the hit took place? Blitz has mentioned that if its along the line then its legal, as long as the defensive player isn't being held by an offensive-lineman, but if the play is happening 25 yards downfield, is the cut block at the original line of scrimmage still legal?
Post Reply