| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 42638
Location: Dallas, TX
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:48 pm Post subject: Tate fined $21k for hit on Lee |
 |
|
|
Tim MacMahon reporting on ESPN that Tate was fined $21k for hit on Lee
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sacks98
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 3807
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Hope his team mates help pay for it if he doesn't won the appeal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 42638
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Will his appeal hinge on SOS's theory that he was involved in the play therefore its not an illegal hit?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas_OutLaw7
Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23067
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Pssst. MH. It's being discussed in their version of TACT thread.
_________________
In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sacks98
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 3807
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | Will his appeal hinge on SOS's theory that he was involved in the play therefore its not an illegal hit? |
After seeing the picture i thought it could of gone either way because he did lead with his shoulder at first and he did get in front of him Lee just didn't see him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pie Romania
Joined: 23 Aug 2012
Posts: 1766
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
He didn't initially contact the head. The reason the facemask made contact was due to Lee's head whipping forward.
I guess this is today's NFL though and unfortunately it is what it is. Tate SHOULD appeal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 42638
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Tate benefits from protection as a defenseless player, why shouldn't Lee?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sacks98
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 3807
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | Tate benefits from protection as a defenseless player, why shouldn't Lee? |
Tate was trying to get in front of him though it's just that Lee wasn't paying attention to him i think what got Tate was a little bit of his helmet hitting Lee in the neck area. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 42638
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sacks98 wrote: | | MaddHatter wrote: | | Tate benefits from protection as a defenseless player, why shouldn't Lee? |
Tate was trying to get in front of him though it's just that Lee wasn't paying attention to him i think what got Tate was a little bit of his helmet hitting Lee in the neck area. |
This offseason Goodell included crackback blocks within the defenseless player rule for player safety - it was an illegal hit and thusly properly fined
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/28/nfl-expands-defenseless-player-rule-to-crackback-blocks/
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JOEJOE
Joined: 30 Aug 2011
Posts: 695
Location: 'DrunkMode' in Playersville
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
What B/S this league is getting so weak now a days. You know Tate could've went for Lee's knees and completely torn both of his ACLs and given himself a concussion in the process, I'm sorry but that was a CLEAN pill-back block, if I've ever seen one... Goodell is ruining this game with this safety B/S... IT WAS A CLEAN BLOCK, The only reason it was fined was because it looked worse that it was.
_________________
Adopt-a-Hawk
Bruce Irvin= Sacks: 4-1/2, Tackles: 5, FF: 1
Golden Tate= Rec: 10, Yds: 144, Avg: 14.4, TD: 3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas_OutLaw7
Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23067
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| JOEJOE wrote: | | What B/S this league is getting so weak now a days. You know Tate could've went for Lee's knees and completely torn both of his ACLs and given himself a concussion in the process, I'm sorry but that was a CLEAN pill-back block, if I've ever seen one... Goodell is ruining this game with this safety B/S... IT WAS A CLEAN BLOCK, The only reason it was fined was because it looked worse that it was. |
Actually. Blame the players. Lawsuit after lawsuit directed at the NFL for lack of safety has caused these rules to be implemented. Goodell has to protect his company - and part of that is to prevent these lawsuits from former players.
_________________
In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JOEJOE
Joined: 30 Aug 2011
Posts: 695
Location: 'DrunkMode' in Playersville
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | Sacks98 wrote: | | MaddHatter wrote: | | Tate benefits from protection as a defenseless player, why shouldn't Lee? |
Tate was trying to get in front of him though it's just that Lee wasn't paying attention to him i think what got Tate was a little bit of his helmet hitting Lee in the neck area. |
This offseason Goodell included crackback blocks within the defenseless player rule for player safety - it was an illegal hit and thusly properly fined
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/28/nfl-expands-defenseless-player-rule-to-crackback-blocks/ |
Yeah well there's one problem with your theory, You're judging the hit on where Tate's helmet ended up and not judging it on where Tate's helmet began... and for anyone who can SEE, can see that Tate's helmet started in Lee's midsection and ended up at the head area..... If Tate can't play his fines I'll happily help him the best I can.
_________________
Adopt-a-Hawk
Bruce Irvin= Sacks: 4-1/2, Tackles: 5, FF: 1
Golden Tate= Rec: 10, Yds: 144, Avg: 14.4, TD: 3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 42638
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
He planted his feet and exploded upward into Lees helmet - just because he started at chest level doesn't matter. He turned his body into a blind side upper cut and every definition of the rule declares it illegal.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khodder
Joined: 19 Dec 2005
Posts: 49920
Location: New New York
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| JOEJOE wrote: | | Yeah well there's one problem with your theory, You're judging the hit on where Tate's helmet ended up and not judging it on where Tate's helmet began... and for anyone who can SEE, can see that Tate's helmet started in Lee's midsection and ended up at the head area..... If Tate can't play his fines I'll happily help him the best I can. |
I am under the impression that any and all hits leading with the crown of the helmet, regardless of where the initial conctact point is.
_________________
FFMD 2014 - ARIZONA CARDINALS GM - CLICK ME - YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JOEJOE
Joined: 30 Aug 2011
Posts: 695
Location: 'DrunkMode' in Playersville
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Texas_OutLaw7 wrote: | | JOEJOE wrote: | | What B/S this league is getting so weak now a days. You know Tate could've went for Lee's knees and completely torn both of his ACLs and given himself a concussion in the process, I'm sorry but that was a CLEAN pill-back block, if I've ever seen one... Goodell is ruining this game with this safety B/S... IT WAS A CLEAN BLOCK, The only reason it was fined was because it looked worse that it was. |
Actually. Blame the players. Lawsuit after lawsuit directed at the NFL for lack of safety has caused these rules to be implemented. Goodell has to protect his company - and part of that is to prevent these lawsuits from former players. |
That's a crock, Goodell has been trying to enforce anything and everything because his a power hungry pig, there has been plenty of hits in the past that where he fined the player and everyone in the NFL community Players/Coaches/Fans and (even the player that was hit) have said Goodell completely missed on that fine... I mean c'mon the first year the NFL has an appeals panel in place and they overturn 4 suspensions for lack of evidence.... That right there is cute, This isn't Goodell's company there are 32 owners in this company and none of them go by the name Goodell.
_________________
Adopt-a-Hawk
Bruce Irvin= Sacks: 4-1/2, Tackles: 5, FF: 1
Golden Tate= Rec: 10, Yds: 144, Avg: 14.4, TD: 3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
