Lefko on CFL: Roughing the passer

What is the difference between roughing the passer and rough play?

It has now become a topic of discussion among Canadian Football League teams, players and the media following the controversial hit by Toronto Argonauts linebacker Ejiro Kuale on Winnipeg Blue Bombers quarterback Buck Pierce on Saturday at the Rogers Centre.

Depending on your point of view, Kuale either hit Pierce late and or with the crown of his helmet. The officials deemed it rough play and booted Kuale from the game, which Winnipeg won 33-24. The Argos led 17-6 when Kuale was ejected.

Argo general manager/head coach Jim Barker called the ejection a game changer because of the dramatic shift in emotion. He said Kuale may have been guilty of a late hit, but it wasn’t blatantly late.

“The referee (Glen Johnson) thought Kuale had intent to injure. I’ve seen players get helmet-to-helmet hits and not get ejected; 25-yard penalties; late hits, that’s fine,” Barker reasoned. “Ejections are game-changers… I guess referees can measure intent. That’s what referees are going to do now?”

You can understand Barker’s frustration, not to mention Kuale’s, and his teammates, some of whom voiced their disappointment with words that may lead to some disciplinary penalty by the CFL hierarchy as publicly questioning the officials almost always leads to fines.

But how is rough play different from roughing the passer?

It appears to be a grey area and does rough play mean the act was worse or more flagrant than roughing the passer?

According to the CFL rulebook, rough play can be assessed if it’s an act of excessive roughness considered by the referee to warrant disqualification.

Unnecessary roughness can be called by the official if a defensive player contacts the quarterback in an unnecessarily rough manner. It says in the rulebook that once the ball is released, “defensive players must avoid all necessary contact with the passer. A player shall be penalized for any act of unnecessary roughness to the passer for: any blow above the passer’s shoulder; hitting a passer at or below the knees in the pocket; attacking the passer who, after releasing the ball is either standing still or fading backwards; contacting the passer if either the initial source of contact or primary source of contact is the defender’s helmet.”

Therein lay the whole grey area of rough play, roughing the passer and intent to injure.

Last week, the Calgary Stampeders played the Bombers and there were two penalties called against the Stamps for roughing the passer.

The first one involved safety Demetrice Morley, who hit Pierce well after he had thrown the ball. As a result, the referees issued the 15-yard penalty, but didn’t eject him from the game for rough play, which it appeared to be.

In the second example, Stamps defensive lineman Robert McCune hit Pierce after he had thrown the ball, but appeared to be doing his best to avoid contact, even though his forward momentum couldn’t stop him. Pierce suffered a bruised quad and was forced out of the game.

The Argos lost the services of starting quarterback Cleo Lemon in the first half against the Bombers after he was injured on a helmet-t-helmet collision with Bombers linebacker Joe Lobendahn. No penalty was called on the play and it appeared as if Lemon lowered his head before the hit.

There have already been a couple of examples so far this season in which players have been hit with fines for leading with their helmets. It is an issue the CFL is trying to eliminate.

It will be interesting to see how this all unfolds when the CFL evaluates the Argos game and decides what course of action it will take. This may be a time to provide some clear explanation and understanding of the difference between roughing the passer and rough play.

If it simply comes down to the discretion of the official, then it’s a judgment call, plain and simple. But one man’s judgment can be different from another, and what one deems to be roughing the passer, the other may view it as rough play.

The officials are clearly doing everything they can to call roughing the passer, even to the point of extreme. Maybe it is better to err on the side of caution, even if it means a 15-yard penalty, then not call anything at all.

But calling rough play, well, that’s totally different because the penalty is harsher – as Kuale and the Argos discovered.