The Canadian Football League did the right thing in fining various players and one head coach for their respective actions - physical or verbal - in games last weekend.
What isn't known - and won't be publicized - is what happened behind closed doors concerning the officiating, specifically Glen Johnson, on his controversial call on Argos middle linebacker Ejiro Kuale for hitting Winnipeg Blue Bombers quarterback Buck Pierce with the crown of his helmet well after the ball had been released. The CFL announced on Wednesday that Kuale was fined an undisclosed amount (players are not allowed to be docked more than half a game's pay), while teammate Ricky Foley received a fine for derogatory comments about the officiating. Argos general manager/head coach Jim Barker received a $1,000 fine for criticizing the officials.
Johnson deemed Kuale's hit severe enough to label it as rough play, which gives the referee the right to eject a player via disqualification. Johnson gave Kuale the boot.
Ejecting a player for rough play is nothing new, but in this case the act and how Johnson interpreted it - intent to injure - has caused quite the debate.
How do you determine intent to injure? Can you read into a player's mind?
CFL director of officiating, Tom Higgins, told the Toronto Sun: "I would never want to put myself in that position. I'd like Glen to have said to the coach: 'Excessive rough play. Disqualification.' Intent is not someplace we ever want to go. No one knows intent. You have to do it on the act. And that's what (Johnson) did … In this situation the coach himself said there was a late hit. What made it different is that we don't ever want to officiate on intent. But it was the act. The act of (Kuale) launching himself and going high. We felt there was helmet-to-helmet contact."
Higgins has never been a referee - not in the CFL, at least - so how he can speak with authority is debatable. If you've never been in another man's shoes, or in this case another referee's cleats, what qualifies you as an expert?
Higgins has plenty of experience as a coach and manager, so he can clearly speak to how Barker felt about the call. Barker vociferously disagreed with the ejection and received a $1,000 fine for his remarks because you can't question officials in public.
There has been discussion in the Toronto media that Johnson missed a blatant offside call late in the game by Bombers' rush end Odell Willis, who sacked Argos quarterback Dalton Bell. The ball was dislodged and the Bombers recovered it. There was no penalty assessed to Willis.
All officials are graded on their work each game by Higgins and football operations to determine who is doing a good job, who should be assigned the privilege (not the right) to work in the playoffs and, of course, the Grey Cup - the plum assignment. If an official's work is deemed to be substandard, he might not be re-hired the following season.
Officials make a pittance - they do it part-time - so fining them for blowing calls isn't the route to go. Then again, it's something the public would never know anyway.
It's only known behind closed doors how Johnson's overall work in the Winnipeg/Toronto game has been graded. Maybe he made the right call to eject Kuale and for that he is to be lauded, or maybe he crossed the line by determining it to be intent to injure and is deserving of criticism. Whether he missed the offside call, well, that's another matter all together.
One wonders if there will ever be another example of a referee tossing a player for intent to injure or if moving forward it will merely be explained as excessive rough play.
