Lionbackers.com

Rammer wrote:

Lions4ever wrote:The suspension stands as well it should. I don't care how bad he was being held or what other crap he was enduring. The act was outrageous and the punishment is well deserved IMO.

Actually, I would think in just about any other pro league, that act would have received more of a suspension, and I say that relative to the games each sport plays in the regular season. The league should have resolved this earlier, and it should come out after the weekends play, not after two practices have concluded.

This is correct.

I wonder if Rottier will play this week?


DH

That works out to about a $12,000 fine for Khalif... ouch!

JohnHenry wrote:That works out to about a $12,000 fine for Khalif... ouch!

I hope that is what he is saying.

I don't think Mitchel will be trying to break anyone's arm any time soon. But i wonder if Rottier and other Esks linemen will continue to illegally hold D players even though the refs rarely call them on it?

DanoT wrote:I don't think Mitchel will be trying to break anyone's arm any time soon. But i wonder if Rottier and other Esks linemen will continue to illegally hold D players even though the refs rarely call them on it?

Based on his earlier public comments that this was just a "football play" who knows what he thinks. That might have been for the arbitrator's benefit but that line of argument even in front of an arbitrator (if that was made as the player said it was) is actually helpful to the arbitrator deciding the two games is needed in this case. The arbitrator can in his mind he can honestly conclude that this player just doesn't get it. He thinks what he did was okay!!!!????

We all know the stories of people who are not in control and when in trouble the first time don't learn the lesson.

This means they are a ticking time bomb.

If the Lions are smart now that the process is over they need to make it very clear to him that the play was wrong and won't be tolerated. Mark Trestman type counselling. If not, who knows what will happen in future games.

So far only a few Lion players stated - sort of - that this was wrong.

DanoT wrote:I don't think Mitchel will be trying to break anyone's arm any time soon. But i wonder if Rottier and other Esks linemen will continue to illegally hold D players even though the refs rarely call them on it?

You think the Lions don't hold quite a bit? Get serious.

Blue In BC wrote:Three points:

1. Why was Benevedes disappointed in the leagues suspension? Wouldn't any sane coach be calling for the head of a player on another team that did that to one of his OL?
2. Very disappointed that Mitchell hasn't seemed to acknowledge his brain fart. If he appeals the decision that just further shows his feeling he did nothing wrong.
3. IIRC, Bomber B Dyson was suspended for 3 games for just general rough play / attitude. This was not for any specific play and it wasn't for any play that resulted in an ejection. It was also a decision made after the season ended as a cumulative decision to be applied at the beginning of the next season. Ultimately he left the CFL rather than take a 3 game cut in pay.

Now I'm not suggesting that Dyson wasn't a dirty player, but I don't recall him actually injuring a player or intending to injure a player with this sort of karate move ( or whatever you call it ).

So I'm a bit surprised that Mitchell didn't get 3 games minimum. I suggest minimum because I don't know the extent of Rottier's injury but it should have ( and may have ) been part of the decision.

I know it's a what if question but what if Rottier goes on the 9 game IR with a hyper extended elbow??

Just watched TSN clip and the Lion HC MB response - much like Wally Buono and no doubt on this one he is more Wally B than his own man. At least I hope it is not his character to be so wishy washy on that play.

Go back in time to Messam and his first year in BC where he was mouthing off on the bar incident that he did nothing only later to have a judge decide differently and then Messam goes on to act so badly the players rebelled to the then HC. There was a leadership moment there for the Lions at the first signs when the bar brawl popped up to be new school and intolerant of any behavior that is not becoming a Lion player. Wally went old school (the old days there were bar room brawls but that was then and a different time) and later Messam punches out Paris J. and we got 'boys will be boys' and that the locker is the players' room and they can do what they want. Finally the players got together and went to the HC at the next TC and he's then a star for the Eskimos!!!

I am disappointed the new HC didn't man up here and say that the Lions don't want dirty play and how they will ensure that Khalif gets that message as he is a good player with a promising future and the Lions need him. They don't have to toss him under the boss but if this player doesn't learn from this we will just wait for the next incident. The Lions showed no leadership at all on this one and they have had good time to think about their response once the player's grievance was decided upon by the arbitrator.

The message it seems to give is that dirty play is okay as long as it is the Lions' guy doing it. A player code - not befitting management and coaches.

To me they owe it to this young man to get him the message now and learn. Now just wait and see what happens. Wally was like that in some ways as a HC. They are men so they decide. But in business there is the responsibility of a leader to establish standards and ensure that all understand it. It can't always be unspoken.

Toppy Vann wrote:

I am disappointed the new HC didn't man up here and say that the Lions don't want dirty play and how they will ensure that Khalif gets that message as he is a good player with a promising future and the Lions need him. They don't have to toss him under the boss but if this player doesn't learn from this we will just wait for the next incident. The Lions showed no leadership at all on this one and they have had good time to think about their response once the player's grievance was decided upon by the arbitrator.

The message it seems to give is that dirty play is okay as long as it is the Lions' guy doing it. A player code - not befitting management and coaches.

To me they owe it to this young man to get him the message now and learn. Now just wait and see what happens. Wally was like that in some ways as a HC. They are men so they decide. But in business there is the responsibility of a leader to establish standards and ensure that all understand it. It can't always be unspoken.

In fairness to Benevides we don't know what was or was not said to Mitchell behind close doors.

Blue In BC wrote:

DanoT wrote:I don't think Mitchel will be trying to break anyone's arm any time soon. But i wonder if Rottier and other Esks linemen will continue to illegally hold D players even though the refs rarely call them on it?

You think the Lions don't hold quite a bit? Get serious.

I think all O lines hold, but Esks do it the most according to Doug Brown, Rob Murphy and others.

TheLionKing wrote:

Toppy Vann wrote:

I am disappointed the new HC didn't man up here and say that the Lions don't want dirty play and how they will ensure that Khalif gets that message as he is a good player with a promising future and the Lions need him. They don't have to toss him under the boss but if this player doesn't learn from this we will just wait for the next incident. The Lions showed no leadership at all on this one and they have had good time to think about their response once the player's grievance was decided upon by the arbitrator.

The message it seems to give is that dirty play is okay as long as it is the Lions' guy doing it. A player code - not befitting management and coaches.

To me they owe it to this young man to get him the message now and learn. Now just wait and see what happens. Wally was like that in some ways as a HC. They are men so they decide. But in business there is the responsibility of a leader to establish standards and ensure that all understand it. It can't always be unspoken.

In fairness to Benevides we don't know what was or was not said to Mitchell behind close doors.

I see your point and also that the Lions don't want to trash their guy or anger him so he walks later on to the NFL. I get that. That would be a huge loss if the player said 'ok, I 'm NFL bound' at the first chance.

Leadership as a HC is not more than what takes place behind closed doors. It is what Mark Trestman did when he denounced the dirty play of his guy post game and aid there is no room in the game for that stuff. When you have a team with this many people the entire team needs to get the message.

My point is around the fact the Lions didn't get Messam the message and for BC it was a loss - however good it was that Harris who is more stable got the chance to finally show his stuff.

I feel pro sports must take leadership on issues of fair play etc. We sure know that the NHL doesn't send that message down but football is better for how it works in my view. If they want to develop the game at all levels in Canada coaches have a responsibility to speak to the standards expected. I think it is a public responsibility versus being seen as too much in the camp of 'my player right or wrong.'

In tomorrow's paper and on the internet now is this at the Province which is interesting and suggests to me that the player should have been counseled by someone close to him as to how to conduct his defense. The Lions can't counsel that as it would have interfered with his right to grieve. They could but it is a risk for the employer if the player makes that complaint to the Arbitrator! A big problem.

The fact the player hurt has yet to play a game must too have been a big part of the 2 games- not just the remorse issue here. The NHL doesn't much get that part.

Mitchell received the news from CFL Players Association legal representative Ed Molstad before practice Wednesday and suggested his reaction to the play was as much responsible for the decision to maintain the suspension as the act itself, which to date has prevented Rottier from returning to the Edmonton lineup.

“[The arbitrator] told me I didn’t show no remorse, and that it just wasn’t a football play,” Mitchell said. “I told him at the time, when I was [pulling Rottier], that was the way to get him off me.

“The judge handled it like a judge, from what I could tell. I respected him and the way it was done. I’m just glad we finally know something.”

Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/Lions+storie ... z23g6HWqTW

A communications major at East Carolina, Mitchell spoke before Lions general manager Wally Buono issued a ban on discussion of the decision, though the tackle remained in uniform throughout practice.

“The club supports the CFL’s continued work with players and their association to safeguard player health and safety.” Buono said in a statement released by the club, which almost to the word was issued in an earlier email by Cohon....Free speech was definitely a big loser, but justice and process prevailed.

---

This article on minor hockey is a good example. Brawling coach suspended from league play only to be elected to the Board while serving a supension:

New Westminster hockey mom outraged suspended fisticuffs coach elected to minor hockey association board


By JOHN COLEBOURN, The Province

Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/sports/Westm ... z23g9YCJKy

I think Lions HC and GM were wise to say very little while the arbitration was being held. It is unfortunate that the process took so long.

Mitchell should have gone with the "I was provoked" defence that might have reduced the suspension rather than the "It was a football move" defence which was aimed at getting off scott free and very unlikely to be accepted by a non football arbitrator.

DanoT wrote:I think Lions HC and GM were wise to say very little while the arbitration was being held. It is unfortunate that the process took so long.

Mitchell should have gone with the "I was provoked" defence that might have reduced the suspension rather than the "It was a football move" defence which was aimed at getting off scott free and very unlikely to be accepted by a non football arbitrator.

I was thinking that Mitchell should have said that he was trying to throw Rottier aside, the O Lineman's hand and arm were stuck to Mitchell's chest, and instead of throwing Rottier, he ended up just wringing his arm. If Rottier's hand was not stuck grasping Mitchell's jersey, Mitchell could contend that he would indeed have thrown Rottier to the side. D Linemen do attempt to throw O Linemen to the side on almost every play.

In a legal move, Mitchell might grab Rottier's right shoulder with his own left hand, grab Rottier's left chest area with his own right hand, pivot his body, and leverage throw Rottier to the side. In this case, Rottier's arm was glued there, and Mitchell dangerously tried to throw him with just his arm as leverage, too much pressure on Rottier's arm.

The other thing is ... Do we really know what Mitchell was trying to do on that play? Was he trying to throw Rottier to the side? Or was he trying to rip Rottier's arm off? Was he deliberately trying to injure Rottier?

Whatever the case, Mitchell should learn that some things that can be done on the field are just too dangerous, whatever the intent. Arm bars are dangerous. We know that. Could an arm bar happen accidentally in football? If an O Lineman has his hand grasping the jersey, and the D Lineman is spinning away, I would say yes. In this case the league and the arbitrator ruled and that is that.

DanoT wrote:I think Lions HC and GM were wise to say very little while the arbitration was being held. It is unfortunate that the process took so long.

Mitchell should have gone with the "I was provoked" defence that might have reduced the suspension rather than the "It was a football move" defence which was aimed at getting off scott free and very unlikely to be accepted by a non football arbitrator.

There is only ONE defense that might have worked and that was to have brought lawyer Alan Shore to attack the CFL's case



http://www.evtv1.com/player.aspx?itemnum=1664

Glad it's over, can't believe this went on as long as it has. I guess though at the end of the day the league imposed it's penalty, the player got his chance to appeal and the system stumbled through the process the way it was designed to.

The CFL needs to learn from the NHL from this one. The longer you drag things out, the less confident the fans are that you are capable of making the right decision. The good news is that based on the indignation expressed on some fan sites, we all know now that two games in a similar incident will not be acceptable to the majority of fans. This should help the league in future deliberations.